ArticleThe Saudi dental journal2026
Bone dimensional stability with versus without a stent following apically repositioned flap and single-stage implant placement: a randomized clinical trial.
Article in The Saudi dental journal, 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
Maintaining peri-implant bone and tissue health is essential for long-term implant success. The effectiveness of adjunctive stent stabilization is still unclear, though the apically repositioned flap (ARF) improves soft tissue conditions. Therefore, this study assessed whether the use of stents during single-stage placement improves peri-implant bone changes and clinical outcomes following ARF. This randomized clinical trial included twenty partially edentulous patients who were divided into two groups: ARF with stent stabilization (n = 10) and ARF using conventional suturing (n = 10). At baseline, three months, and six months, radiographic bone dimensions measured by cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) were recorded, along with clinical parameters including probing depth (PD), plaque index (PI), and bleeding index (BI). Appropriate statistical tests were used for intragroup and intergroup comparisons (α = 0.05). No statistically significant intergroup differences were observed for any clinical or radiographic outcomes (p > 0.05). Over the course of the trial, PD, PI, and BI remained stable in both groups. Neither group's bone width changed significantly, according to CBCT data. The stent group's bone height remained stable (p = 0.216), the control group's bone height significantly decreased from baseline (p < 0.001), mostly in the early stages of healing. Within the limitations of this randomized clinical trial, ARF performed during single-stage implant placement produced anticipated early bone remodeling and stable peri-implant clinical conditions. When compared to traditional suturing, adjunctive stent stabilization did not offer any significant clinical or radiological advantages.
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.