Trial reportOral and maxillofacial surgery2025
Management of alveolar osteitis: new regenerative techniques in patients with type 2 diabetes.
Trial report in Oral and maxillofacial surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- QbD Approach for Development of a Mucoadhesive Thermosensitive Gel for Oral Application: Risk Assessment Followed by Screening and Optimization.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of Autologous Plasma Rich in Growth Factors on Healing of Extraction Socket-A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
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
objectivesEvaluation of the effectiveness Gengigel
methodsThis is a blind RCT study clinical prospective study in 69 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus with alveolar osteitis. The subjects selected for study were examined under the inclusion and exclusion criteria and sign the written consent. The patients were blind randomly assigned into two groups: The Group I included 35 patients with alveolar osteitis, in which complex treatment including HA and magnetic laser therapy was carried out. The Group II is represented by 34 patients, with alveolar osteitis received treatment including antiseptic and inflammatory agents. Healing time and pain levels of the alveolar socket of the extracted tooth were appreciated. The pain levels in dynamics were assessed according to VAS.
resultsAfter the 5th treatment session, 91% of patients in the 1st group had a VAS score of 0 (no pain), whereas in 9% of patients, the VAS score was 1-3. In group 2, a similar result of the VAS score was recorded but only on the 8th day of treatment.
conclusionThe results show that the use of Gengigel CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40198407What 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.