Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32144515›Full record

Trial reportClinical oral investigations2020

Alvogyl and absorbable gelatin sponge as palatal wound dressings following epithelialized free gingival graft harvest: a randomized clinical trial.

Karim Ehab, Omneya Abouldahab, Abdallah Hassan, Karim M Fawzy El-Sayed

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03402321 (Clinical Comparison of Alveogyl and Gelatin Sponge in the Management of Pain After Epithelialized Free Gingival Graft Harvesting), which is not on this map. Cited by 32 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03402321 phase4unknown statusnot on this map

Clinical Comparison of Alveogyl and Gelatin Sponge in the Management of Pain After Epithelialized Free Gingival Graft Harvesting: A Randomized Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorKarim ehab gergesRan2019 to 2019Enrolled36ConditionsPain, ProceduralArmsGelatin Sponge Sheet, Alvogyl
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Karim EhabPrivate dental clinic, Fayyoum, Egypt.
Omneya AbouldahabOral Medicine and Periodontology Department, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt.
Abdallah HassanPeriodontology Department, School of Dentistry, New Giza University, Giza, Egypt.
Karim M Fawzy El-SayedOral Medicine and Periodontology Department, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt. karim.fawzy@gmail.com.
Cairo University · EGFayoum University · EG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis randomized controlled trial compares for the first time effects of Alvogyl versus absorbable gelatin sponge as palatal wound dressings on postoperative pain, amount of analgesic consumption, post-surgical bleeding, and wound re-epithelization. MATERIALS AND

methodsFollowing sample size calculation, 36 systemically healthy patients requiring palatal mucosal graft harvesting were randomized to receive Alvogyl (intervention group, 18 patients) or absorbable gelatin sponge (control group, 18 patients) palatal dressings. Patient-reported VAS pain scores over 2 weeks were defined as primary outcome. Post-surgical bleeding, number of analgesics consumed, and complete re-epithelialization of the palatal wound for up to 5 weeks were defined as secondary outcomes.

resultsAlthough significantly higher VAS pain scores were reported in the control as compared with the intervention group up to 12 days post-surgically (from (median [range]) 8.5 [2-10] to 1 [0-2] and from 6 [0-10] to 0 [0-2] respectively), with higher analgesics consumption (from 2 [1-3] to 1 [0-3] and from 1 [0-3] to 0 [0-2] tablets respectively), a multivariate regression analysis considering age, gender, graft width/length, tissue thickness, analgesics intake, and dressing type demonstrated no statistically significant effect of any factor, including dressing type on VAS pain scores. At 4 weeks, 22.2% of patients in the intervention group versus 11.1% in the control group demonstrated complete re-epithelization of their palatal engraftment site, before complete re-epithelization in both groups at 5 weeks. No post-surgical bleeding was reported with both dressings.

conclusionsWithin the study's limitations, results suggest Alvogyl as a practical palatal surgical dressing, comparable with absorbable gelatin sponge in cost, pain reduction, hemostasis, and re-epithelization properties.

trial registrationwww.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03402321 CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Alvogyl could present a novel palatal wound dressing material, comparable with gelatin sponge.

Indexed as

PalateWound HealingAdultBandagesDrug CombinationsEugenolFemaleGelatin Sponge, AbsorbableGingivaHumansHydrocarbons, IodinatedMaleOils, Volatilepara-AminobenzoatesYoung Adultbutyl aminobenzoate, eugenol, iodoform, spearmint oil drug combinationsDrug CombinationsEugenolHydrocarbons, IodinatedOils, Volatilepara-AminobenzoatesAlvogylGelatinHealingPainPalateWound

Identifiers

PMID32144515
OpenAlexW3009571900

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.