Trial reportScientific reports2020
Effect of antiseptic gels in the microbiologic colonization of the suture threads after oral surgery.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Experimental Investigation of the Effects of 'Nigella sativa' and 'Vitis vinifera' on Intraoral Wound Healing.Oral health & preventive dentistry · 2026Article
- Article
- Effects of Antiseptic Formulations on Oral Microbiota and Related Systemic Diseases: A Scoping Review.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Selective outcome reporting concerning antibiotics and third molar surgery.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
- Applications of chitosan in oral health and diseases.Frontiers in oral health · 2025Review
- Evaluation of the effects of Andiz extract on the experimentally wound in rats by microbiological and gene expression methods.Molecular biology reports · 2024Article
- Topical oxygen therapy as a novel strategy to promote wound healing and control the bacteria in implantology, oral surgery and periodontology: A review.The Saudi dental journal · 2024Review
- Efficacy of Chlorhexidine after Oral Surgery Procedures on Wound Healing: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Overview on Adjunct Ingredients Used in Hydroxyapatite-Based Oral Care Products.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Article
- Microbiological Analysis of Bacterial Plaque on Various Suture Types Used in Third Molar Surgical Extraction: a Systematic Review.Journal of oral & maxillofacial researchReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Three different bioadhesive gels were evaluated in a double-blind randomized clinical trial in which microbial growth in the suture thread was assessed following post-surgical application of the aforementioned gels. Also assessed in this trial were, the intensity of post-surgical pain as well as the degree of healing of the patients' surgical wounds. A total of 21 patients (with 42 wisdom teeth) participated in this trial. Chlorhexidine gel, chlorhexidine-chitosan gel, and hyaluronic acid gel were evaluated, with a neutral water-based gel serving as the control agent. The aerobic and facultative anaerobic bacterial recovery on blood agar was lower in the placebo group than in the experimental groups. The most significant difference (p = 0.04) was observed in the chlorhexidine-chitosan group. in which the growth of Blood Agar and Mitis Salivarius Agar was significantly higher than in the placebo group. The intensity of post-surgical pain was very similar among all the groups. Significantly better healing rates were observed in the patients treated with chlorhexidine-chitosan gel when compared with those who used the placebo gel (p = 0.03), and in particular when compared with those patients who used hyaluronic acid gel (p = 0.01). Through our microbiological analyses, we were able to conclude that none of the bioadhesive gels tested resulted in beneficial reductions in the bacterial/fungal populations. However, the healing rates of patients who were treated with chlorhexidine-chitosan were better than those of the patients who used either the placebo gel or the hyaluronic acid gel.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.