Trial reportBMC oral health2026
Extended platelet rich fibrin versus allograft as a space filling material in immediate dental implant placement.
Trial report in BMC oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07445776 (Extended Platelet Rich Fibrin Versus Allograft as Space Filling Material in Immediate Dental Implant Placement), which is not on this 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.
Extended Platelet Rich Fibrin Versus Allograft as Space Filling Material in Immediate Dental Implant Placement
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImmediate implant has been one of the solutions to decrease bone resorption after tooth extraction. Gap distance between the dental implant and adjacent bone has undergone much research to enhance bone formation in this area. This is small exploratory study that aimed to compare the efficacy of extended platelet rich fibrin (e-PRF) a regenerative biomaterial produced by heating platelet-poor plasma (PPP) to denature albumin, extending the resorption time of standard PRF from 2 to 3 weeks to 4-6 months, as well as allograft as a space filling material in immediate dental implant placement. PATIENTS AND
methodsTwenty-eight implants were placed for the prosthetic replacement of non-restorable single-rooted maxillary teeth using immediate implant placement. Patients were randomly allocated into two equal groups (n = 14 each). In Group I, allograft was placed in the peri-implant gap, whereas in Group II, e-PRF was used. Implant stability was assessed using resonance frequency analysis (RFA). Buccal bone thickness and marginal bone loss were evaluated using CBCT throughout the follow-up period. Statistical analysis was performed on all clinical and radiographic data.
resultsA total of 28 patients received 28 immediate implants in the maxillary esthetic zone. During the 12-month follow-up period, all implants were successful with no complications. No statistically significant differences were observed between the groups regarding implant stability, marginal bone loss, or buccal bone thickness.
conclusionWithin this small exploratory trial, no statistically significant intergroup differences were detected between e-PRF and allograft as space-filling materials around immediate implants regarding stability, marginal bone loss, and buccal bone thickness.
trial registrationClinical-Trials.gov PRS ( https://register. CLINICALTRIALS: gov ) has this study registered under the identifier number. NCT07445776 on 03/02/2026.
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.