ArticleJournal of medical biochemistry2025
The effect of absorbable collagen suture for oral implant repair on wound healing and inflammation factors of gingival crevicular fluid.
Article in Journal of medical biochemistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To investigate the clinical value of absorbable collagen suture in the treatment of oral implant restoration. Methods: A prospective, randomized, single-blind trial was conducted in patients undergoing dental implant restoration in our hospital. The patients were divided into an absorbable group (incision closure with absorbable collagen suture) and a conventional group (incision closure with conventional suture). The incision healing time, postoperative pain degree, incision healing grade, patient satisfaction, and the levels of tumor necrosis factor-a (TNF-a), interleukin-8 (IL-8) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) in gingival crevicular fluid were compared between the two groups. Results: The absorbable group had faster incision healing times and lower postoperative pain scores on days 1 and 2, all with significant differences (P<0.05). Wound healing in the absorbable group was notably better, with a Grade A healing rate of 96.88% and a Grade B healing rate of 3.13%. In contrast, the conventional group had a Grade A healing rate of 81.25%, a Grade B healing rate of 17.19%, and a Grade C healing rate of 1.56%. These differences favored the absorbable group significantly (P<0.05). Before surgery, there were no statistically significant differences in the levels of TNF-a, IL-6, and IL-8 in gingival crevicular fluid between the absorbable and conventional groups (P>0.05). However, 3 days after surgery, the absorbable group showed significantly lower levels of TNFa, IL-6, and IL-8 compared to the conventional group (P<0.05). Patient satisfaction rates for stability, aesthetics, chewing function, and pronunciation were similar between the two groups (P>0.05). However, patients in the absorbable group reported significantly higher comfort levels compared to those in the conventional group (P<0.05). Moreover, the complication rate in the absorbable group was significantly lower at 6.25% compared to 18.75% in the conventional group (P<0.05). Conclusions: Absorbable collagen suture for oral implant prosthesis after suture, beneficial to wound healing and reduce postoperative pain and inflammation.
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.