Trial reportBMC oral health2025
Comparison of vertical releasing incisions and horizontal extending incisions for periodontal accelerated osteogenic orthodontics in the anterior region: a randomized controlled trial with clinical and radiographic outcomes.
Trial report in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05441683 (Comparison of Vertical Releasing Incisions and Horizontal Extending Incisions for Periodontal Accelerated Osteogenic Orthodontics in the Anterior Region), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Comparison of Vertical Releasing Incisions and Horizontal Extending Incisions for Periodontal Accelerated Osteogenic Orthodontics in the Anterior Region: A Randomized Controlled Trial With Surgical Time, Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPeriodontal accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO) requires precise flap design for aesthetic preservation, functional stability, and rapid recovery. This study compared two additional flap incisions—vertical releasing incision (VRI) and horizontal extending incision (HEI) for PAOO in the anterior region.
methodsTwenty-two orthodontic patients requiring PAOO were randomized into the VRI or HEI group. Immediately after surgery, the surgical time and graft material weight were recorded. Wound healing was evaluated at 1 and 2 weeks post-surgery. Soft-tissue parameters, such as probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), keratinized gingival width (KGW), and gingival recession depth (GRD), were assessed at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months. To assess hard-tissue changes, including root length, vertical bone level (VBL), and bone width measured at 2 mm (BW2), 4 mm (BW4), and 6 mm (BW6) below the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ), cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were performed at baseline, 6, and 12 months. Lateral cephalometric analysis was performed to evaluate tooth movement before and after orthodontic treatment.
resultsPatient-level analyses revealed that the HEI technique had shorter surgical time (57.66 ± 5.01 min vs. 68.50 ± 13.50 min, p = 0.029) and a lower incidence of scarring (10% vs. 60%) than VRI. At the tooth-level, HEI achieved significantly greater labial bone width (BW2, BW4, BW6; all p < 0.001). Both groups showed comparable KGW increases (VRI: 0.71 ± 1.15 mm; HEI: 0.85 ± 1.13 mm) and VBL changes (VRI: 2.94 ± 2.79 mm; HEI: 2.69 ± 2.96 mm) at 12 months. No significant differences were observed between the groups regarding postsurgical pain or mucosal condition.
conclusionsBoth flap techniques were effective in improving KGW and bone augmentation (VBL, BW2, BW4, BW6), with HEI showing advantages in terms of surgical time, reduced scar formation, and greater bone width in PAOO surgery.
trial registrationRegistered on clinicaltrial.gov; NCT05441683, 13/6/2022.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.