The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Clinical outcomes of implants following lateral bone augmentation: systematic assessment of available options (barrier membranes, bone grafts, split osteotomy)
Open accessAbstract
Objective: To compare the clinical outcomes related to implants following lateral augmentation procedures (GBR, bone grafts, split osteotomy) with implants placed in pristine sites. Material and Methods: A systematic review of all prospective studies of implants placed simultaneously or as a second surgery following lateral augmentation compared with implants placed in pristine bone with 6 months of loading was performed. Results: From 435 potentially relevant publications, 125 full‐text publications were screened and four were identified as fulfilling the inclusion criteria. Three studies compared implants placed with simultaneous GBR or with a bone substitute and one with autogenous bone graft as a staged procedure. The implant survival at the augmented sites irrespective of the procedure used varied from 91.7% to 100% and from 93.2% to 100% at the control sites for a period between 12 and 59.1 months. Conclusions: Within the limits of the systematic review there was evidence that the evaluated augmentation techniques result in similar implant survival between augmented and pristine sites. The small number of retrieved studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria limited the conclusions regarding the success of the augmentation and its effect on the survival of the implants. Properly designed randomized controlled clinical trials on this topic are needed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Buser, D., Weber, H. ‐., & Lang, N. P. (1990) · Clinical Oral Implants Research · doi:10.1034/j.1600-0501.1990.010105.x · Cited by 724
Cited by
Guided bone regeneration: materials and biological mechanisms revisited
Elgali, I., Omar, O., Dahlin, C., & Thomsen, P. (2017) · European Journal of Oral Sciences · doi:10.1111/eos.12364 · Cited by 848
Guided Bone Regeneration: biological principle and therapeutic applications
Retzepi, M., & Donos, N. (2010) · Clinical Oral Implants Research · doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.01922.x · Cited by 659
Self-citationHorizontal bone augmentation by means of guided bone regeneration
Benic, G. I., & Hämmerle, C. H. F. (2014) · Periodontology 2000 · doi:10.1111/prd.12039 · Cited by 511
Thoma, D. S., Naenni, N., Figuero, E., Hämmerle, C. H. F., Schwarz, F., Jung, R. E., & Sanz‐Sánchez, I. (2018) · Clinical Oral Implants Research · doi:10.1111/clr.13114 · Cited by 490
Jung, R. E., Fenner, N., Hämmerle, C. H. F., & Zitzmann, N. U. (2013) · Clinical Oral Implants Research · doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02522.x · Cited by 253
Metadata
- Authors
- Donos, N., Mardas, N., & Chadha, V.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Periodontology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-08-26
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- s8
- Pages
- 173-202
- ISSN
- 0303-6979 (ISSN-L)
- 1600-051X
- OpenAlex
- W2108143331
- Cited by
- 296
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 11.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Clinical outcomes of implants following lateral bone augmentation: systematic assessment of available options (barrier membranes, bone grafts, split osteotomy). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1600-051x.2008.01269.x
- The paper
- Donos, N., Mardas, N., & Chadha, V. (2008). Clinical outcomes of implants following lateral bone augmentation: systematic assessment of available options (barrier membranes, bone grafts, split osteotomy). Journal of Clinical Periodontology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051x.2008.01269.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.