ArticleJournal of oral biology and craniofacial research
Patient centered comparative evaluation of injectable platelet concentrate with or without micro-needling in the management of thin gingival phenotype: A randomized clinical trial.
Article in Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: To evaluate the clinical and patient-centered outcomes of Injectable Platelet Concentrate (IPC) and Microneedling (MN) in augmenting thin gingival phenotype (GP). Materials and methods: The present study was a patient-centered, split-mouth, randomized clinical trial involving 26 participants with thin GP who were randomly treated with IPC + MN (Group 1) and IPC-MN (Group 2). Clinician oriented parameters such as Gingival Thickness (GT), Keratinized Tissue Width (KTW) and Probe Visibility (PV) in addition to Patient Reported Outcomes (PROMs) in form of Translucent Tissue Visibility Score (TTVS) for appearance of underlying hard tissue through thin gingiva were measured at baseline, 1 month, 2 months and 3 months. Overall Plaque Index (PI), Gingival Index (GI), Probing Pocket Depth (PPD), Gingival Bleeding Index (GBI), Specific PI (S-PI), Specific GI (S-GI), and Specific-GBI (S-GBI) were also assessed for additional information. Results: The study demonstrated a significant increase in GT for both treatment groups, with Group 1 (IPC + MN) showing greater augmentation compared to Group 2 (IPC-MN) (p < 0.005). Analysis of PROMs revealed that TTVS significantly decreased, with Group 1 (IPC + MN) showing a complete reduction in translucency at 3 months (0 %) compared to 38.5 % in Group 2 (IPC-MN) (p < 0.005). Overall, PI and GI increased slightly over time, but no significant differences were observed between the groups. S-GBI improved with increasing GT, indicating better tissue stability. Conclusion: The combination of IPC and MN significantly enhances GT and reduces gingival translucency, making it a promising approach for managing thin gingival phenotypes. However, the associated decrease in brushing comfort highlights the need for patient-specific considerations when selecting treatment modalities. Future studies should explore long-term outcomes and patient adaptation to increased gingival thickness.
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.