ArticleDentistry journal2026
Five-Year Retrospective Radiographic Analysis of Peri-Implant Bone Stability: A Comparison Between Two Socket Preservation Protocols and Spontaneous Healing.
Article in Dentistry 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe primary objective of this retrospective pilot study was to evaluate the long-term radiographic stability of peri-implant marginal bone levels (MBLs) at a five-year follow-up, comparing two different socket preservation protocols against spontaneous healing. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 24 patients who underwent tooth extraction followed by delayed implant placement were divided into three groups of 8 subjects each. Test Group 1 was treated with a heterologous cortico-cancellous bone graft covered by a slow-resorbing bovine pericardium membrane. Test Group 2 received the same bone graft but covered by a rapidly resorbing native porcine collagen membrane. The Control Group was left to heal spontaneously. Marginal bone loss (MBL) was calculated radiographically by measuring the difference in bone levels between the time of osseointegration (T0) and the 5-year follow-up (T1). For each implant, mesial and distal MBL values were averaged to obtain a single mean per-implant MBL value for group-level analysis.
resultsThe 5-year implant survival rate was 100% across all analyzed groups. Test Group 1 demonstrated the highest peri-implant bone stability, recording a mean MBL of 0.17±0.20 mm. In contrast, Test Group 2 and the Control Group exhibited greater resorption, with mean MBL values of 0.46±0.12 mm and 0.45±0.27 mm, respectively. Descriptive analysis indicated a trend toward improved peri-implant bone preservation in the group treated with biomaterial and a slow-resorbing pericardium membrane compared to both the short-resorbing collagen membrane group and the spontaneous healing control group.
conclusionsWithin the limitations of this pilot study, the results suggest that the choice of barrier membrane in socket preservation procedures could affect 5-year marginal bone stability. The application of a slow-resorbing membrane provided a prolonged barrier action and showed a descriptive trend of lower mean marginal bone loss. However, the extremely small sample size precludes establishing clinical superiority over standard collagen membranes or spontaneous healing. Further randomized clinical trials with larger cohorts are necessary to confirm these long-term findings.
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.