PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 11, 2026Bioengineering1 citationsOpen Access

Alveolar Ridge Preservation Revisited: A Multimodal Evaluation of Bone Preservation and Regeneration—Preliminary Findings from a Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

View Full Paper
AHAnja HeselichRNRamin NajafiSASami Alammawi

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

Alveolar ridge preservation using biomaterials is a well-established approach to counteract post-extraction bone resorption and optimize conditions for implant placement. However, most studies rely only on a single evaluation method and thereby risk overlooking essential aspects of alveolar regeneration. This preliminary analysis aimed to assess alveolar ridge preservation outcome using a multimodal approach combining histomorphometric, radiological, and image-based visualization methods. Twenty out of a planned 60 patients per group from an ongoing randomized controlled clinical trial were included. Patients were allocated to alveolar ridge preservation with a bone substitute material (BSM), a collagen-based material, a combination of both, or natural healing as control. Outcomes included CBCT-based volumetric analysis, histomorphometry, and primary implant stability via ISQ. Mineralized bone volume was significantly better preserved in bone substitute material groups compared to other groups, with BSM combined with collagen yielding the highest values. Histomorphometrically determined hard tissue fractions and implant stability were comparable across groups. Notably, CBCT-based visualization revealed non-ossified hypodense regions, so-called cavitations or covered socket residuum (CSR) within the former extraction sockets across all groups, independent of the biomaterial applied. BSM-based alveolar ridge preservation, particularly combined with a collagen membrane, most effectively maintained mineralized bone volume after extraction. Beside volumetric benefits, this preliminary in-dept analysis of the first part of the trial highlights cavitations/CSRs as a potentially underrecognized feature of post-extraction healing. Integrating quantitative with qualitative visualization-based assessments provides a more complete understanding of alveolar bone regeneration.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Heselich et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69debc2240ea06567955942chttps://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering13040447
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Histological Comparison of Healing Extraction Sockets Implanted With Bioactive Glass or Demineralized Freeze‐Dried Bone Allograft: A Pilot Study2002 · 295 citations
  2. 2Reasons for tooth extraction in the western states of Germany1993 · 197 citations
  3. 3Bone Graft Packing and Its Association with Bone Regeneration in Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentations: Histomorphometric Analysis of Human Biopsies2022 · 11 citations
  4. 4Bone Augmentation Techniques2007 · 734 citations
  5. 5Histomorphometric Analysis of Osseointegrated Intraosseous Dental Implants Using Undecalcified Specimens: A Scoping Review2024 · 12 citations