Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35291345›Full record

ArticleBioinformation2021

Soft tissue re-growth after different crown lengthening techniques among Indian patients.

Siddharth Narayan, Arvina Rajasekar

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Siddharth NarayanDepartment of Periodontology, Saveetha Dental College, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Chennai-600077, Tamilnadu, India.
Arvina RajasekarDepartment of Periodontology, Saveetha Dental College, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Chennai-600077, Tamilnadu, India.
Saveetha University · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patients often report complaining of fractured or decayed teeth with severe morphological deformities. However, all these clinical scenarios require the same level of care and consideration to rehabilitate form, function and esthetics. Some cases have sufficient clinical crown height while others often require an interdisciplinary approach in the form of orthodontic/surgical extrusion or surgical periodontal options. A common factor delaying treatment is soft tissue regrowth after crown lengthening which delays the impression required for final prosthesis. Therefore, it is of interest to compare the prevalence of soft tissue regrowth a week after different crown lengthening techniques including laser gingivectomy, electrocautery gingivectomy, modified Widman flap and apically repositioned. The parameters assessed included 1-week postoperative soft tissue regrowth after crown lengthening, age of patients and gender. It was observed that laser and electrocautery-assisted gingivectomy had a higher rate of soft tissue regrowth as compared to surgical techniques. It was further noted that laser and electrocautery assisted gingivectomy had a higher frequency of soft tissue rebound growth compared to surgical crown lengthening using modified widman flap and apically repositioned flap, which was statistically insignificant. Patients within the age groups of 26-60 years were found to have a higher tendency of soft tissue regrowth, which was found to be clinically and statistically significant (p<0.05).

Indexed as

crown lengtheningelectrocauteryflap surgerygingivectomylasersoft tissue regrowth

Identifiers

PMID35291345
PMCPMC8900161
OpenAlexW4211247572

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.