ArticleCureus2024
Comparison of the Effectiveness of a Novel Matrix-Modified Bovine Collagen Membrane With a Conventional Bovine Collagen Membrane for Oral Mucosal Defects: A Single-Center Study.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Surgical procedures such as excision of a growth or lesion lead to soft tissue or oral mucosal defects. These defects require a proper surgical dressing to promote better wound healing and to avoid infection and scarring. A collagen membrane is one of the most commonly used surgical dressings because of its ease of adaptability to defects and its inherent ability to promote epithelialization and inhibition of pain through the indirect mechanism of preventing infection of the surgical site. Collagen also serves as a reservoir of regenerative factors. The regenerative potential increases as porosity decreases. The novel bovine-derived collagen membrane used in this current study has an average porosity of 20 microns which increases the availability of regenerative factors. Objective The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness between a novel matrix-modified bovine collagen membrane (SurgiColl) and a conventional bovine collagen membrane for promoting wound healing for oral mucosal or soft tissue defects. Materials and methods This clinical trial was conducted in the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Saveetha Dental College and Hospital. The sample size of the study was 20, divided into two groups: novel bovine collagen (Surgicoll-Mesh) (Group 1) and conventional bovine collagen (Group 2) with 10 participants in each group. The randomization process was adopted. The parameters assessed were epithelialization, granulation, and wound contraction at the end of two weeks. All the parameters were assessed using a standardized visual assessment scale. Statistical analysis was done using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 23.0 (Released 2015; IBM Corp., Armonk, New York, United States), and an independent sample t-test was done at 95% confidence interval. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results The difference in epithelialization between the two groups was statistically significant with a p-value of 0.015 (<0.05). The difference in granulation tissue formation between the two groups was statistically significant with a p-value of 0.015 (<0.05). The difference in wound contraction at the end of two weeks between the two groups was also statistically significant with a p-value of 0.005 (<0.05). Group 1 showed superior results compared to Group 2 for all the outcomes assessed. Conclusion The novel bovine-derived collagen membrane (SurgiColl-Mesh) was superior in its properties of wound healing for oral mucosal or soft tissue defects than the conventional bovine collagen membrane.
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.