ArticleBMC oral health2026
Bone changes following horizontal bone augmentation with resorbable and non-resorbable membranes: a retrospective study.
Article in BMC oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlveolar bone augmentation (ABA) procedures are performed using a variety of substitute; however, studies comparing non-resorbable (NRM) and resorbable (RCM) membranes for horizontal ABA are limited. The objective of the present study is to conduct a radiologically comparison of the RCM and NRM on bone changes (BC), utilized in horizontal ABA treatment of edentulous sites.
methodsThe present retrospective-designed study included patients who had received horizontal ABA treatment and, had pre- (T0) and post-treatment (T1) cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were automatically superimposed by Dolphin Software. Two groups were defined in the study: horizontal ABA treatment with RCM and/or NRM. Radiographic measurements such as ridge width(RW), ridge height (RH), ridge angulation (RA), concavity location (CL), concavity depth (CD), cortical bone thickness (CT) on horizontal and vertical BC at 1, 3, 6, 9 and, 12 mm from the alveolar crest. Logistic regression analysis was applied.
resultsHorizontal BC were not statistically significantly different between NRM and RCM at all levels. Membrane stabilization type, RA (T0) and CT-lingual/palatal variables had statistically significant effects on horizontal BC (1 mm); the CA-T0 measurement among the variables of interest had a statistically significant effect on horizontal BC (3 mm) and horizontal BC (6 mm). CD-T0 and CT-coronal values showed a statistically significant association with bone gain; however, the magnitude of this effect per unit increase was limited.
conclusionsNon-resorbable membranes used for horizontal augmentation may be particularly important for stabilization at the alveolar crest. It has been shown that membrane stabilization type, radiographic angles and measurements may be also alter bone changes, highlighting the importance of preoperative radiographic evaluation. However, prospective studies with a more homogeneous distribution are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.