Trial reportClinical oral investigations2025
Comparative evaluation of efficacy of volume stable collagen matrix in interdental papilla reconstruction as compared to connective tissue graft in maxillary esthetic region: a randomized controlled clinical trial.
Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe present study compared and evaluated the efficacy of volume-stable collagen matrix (VCMX) and subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) in interdental papilla reconstruction. MATERIALS AND
methodsParticipants with class II interdental papilla loss (n = 36) were randomly assigned to test (VCMX) and control (SCTG) groups. Papillary height (PH), distance from the contact point to the tip of the papilla (CP-TP), keratinized tissue width (KTW), gingival tissue thickness (GT), and periodontal parameters were assessed at baseline,1, 3, and 6 months. Patient comfort and healing were also evaluated using a visual analog scale (VAS) at 1 week and healing index (HI) at 1,2 and 3 weeks post-operatively.
resultsOn intragroup comparison from baseline to 6 months, a statistically significant gain in papillary height, reduction in CP-TP, and an increase in KTW and GT was found in both groups (p = 0.001). Both groups found statistically significant improvement in the healing index from 1 to 3 weeks (p = 0.001). On intergroup comparison, VCMX showed comparable results to SCTG at 6 months, while VAS showed a statistically lower value in VCMX than SCTG (p = 0.044).
conclusionsVCMX and SCTG were found to be equally effective in interdental papilla reconstruction in terms of gain in papillary height and reduction in CP-TP distance. VCMX resulted in less post-operative pain compared to SCTG. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: VCMX may be preferred for interdental papilla reconstruction by clinicians and individuals due to its unlimited availability, which eliminates the need for an additional harvest site and reduces morbidity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40199770What 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.