Soft Tissue Augmentation
12
2
2
7
Key Insights
Highlights
Success Rate
100% trial completion (above average)
Clinical Risk Assessment
Based on trial outcomes
Moderate Risk
Score: 40/100
0.0%
0 terminated out of 12 trials
100.0%
+13.5% vs benchmark
25%
3 trials in Phase 3/4
14%
1 of 7 completed with results
Key Signals
Data Visualizations
Phase Distribution
Trial Status
Trial Success Rate
Benchmark: 86.5%
Based on 7 completed trials
Clinical Trials (12)
Pontic Site Soft Tissue Augmentation Using De-epithelized Connective Tissue Graft Versus Partially De-epithelized Connective Tissue Graft
The Use of a Porcine Collagen Matrix for the Prevention of Buccal Bone Wall Resorption During Implant Placement in the Aesthetic Zone.
HArmonyCa Injectable Gel for Mid Face Soft Tissue Augmentation
Acellular Dermal Matrix Versus Tenting Technique in Peri-implant Soft Tissue Augmentation and Crestal Bone Stability
Management of the Fresh Extraction Socket in the Aesthetic Area
Evaluation of Omega Roll Envelope Flap for Soft Tissue Augmentation Around Osseointegrated Dental Implants
Esthetic Outcomes Following Immediate Implant Combine With Soft Tissue Augmentation
Clinical Evaluation of Soft Tissue Augmentation Using CTG and PRF Around Immediately Placed Dental Implants Versus Immediate Implant Alone in Esthetic Zone .
PES After Soft Tissue Augmentation Using CTG Around Immediate Dental Implants Versus Immediate Dental Implants Alone in Esthetic Zone
Pontic Site Development With Connective Tissue Graft Using Modified Pouch Technique Versus Pouch Technique
Evaluation of Self-filling Osmotic Tissue Expander in Augmenting Keratinized Tissue Around Dentulous Region
Soft Tissue Evaluation Around Implants Using Prf or a Palatal Pedicle