ArticleJournal of Indian Society of Periodontology
Evaluation of the efficacy of microneedling alone and in combination with injectable hyaluronic acid in augmentation of peri-implant soft tissues: A randomized controlled trial.
Article in Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07294287 (Impact of Microneedling on the Gingival Tissue Surrounding Implant Supported Fixed Restoration.), which is not on this 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.
Impact of Microneedling on the Gingival Tissue Surrounding Implant Supported Fixed Restoration.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hyaluronic Acid-Based Gels and Biomaterial Systems for Oral Wound Healing: Design and Clinical Translation.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- A comprehensive narrative review on the significance of hyaluronic acid for dental implantology.Biomaterial investigations in dentistry · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of injectable hyaluronic acid (HA) combined with microneedling (MN) in augmenting peri-implant soft tissue. Materials and Methods: Sixty-five patients were enrolled and divided into two groups. Group 1 received MN alone, while Group 2 received HA following MN on the peri-implant mucosa. Various parameters - including the plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), peri-implant probing depth, clinical attachment levels, Sulcus Bleeding Index, mucosal thickness (MT), keratinized tissue width (KTW), interproximal width (IPW), and papillary recession height (PRH) - were evaluated at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months postoperatively. Patient-reported outcome measures were assessed to gauge treatment effectiveness and patient satisfaction. Results: Group 2 patients exhibited reduced PI, GI, SBI, PIPD, and CAL compared to Group 1. Both groups showed a significant increase in MT and KTW after 6 months; MT increased to 1.03 ± 0.11 mm in Group 1 and 2.48 ± 0.45 mm in Group 2, while KTW increased to 2.44 ± 0.84 mm in Group 1 and 4.34 ± 1.02 mm in Group 2. In addition, the mean PRH was 1.67 ± 0.32 mm in Group 1 and 0.88 ± 0.25 mm in Group 2, with a mean IPW of 2.19 ± 0.52 mm in Group 1 and 0.90 ± 0.16 mm in Group 2. Conclusion: HA combined with MN leads to increased MT and KTW, reduced inflammation, and improved papillary fill. Thus, HA with MN may serve as an effective short-term implant maintenance modality, assisting clinicians in achieving peri-implant soft tissue regeneration.
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.