ArticleJournal of advanced periodontology & implant dentistry2025
Clinical evaluation of two techniques of soft tissue graft removal (free gingival graft/de-epithelialized and linear/subepithelial technique) from the palate: A prospective cohort study.
Article in Journal of advanced periodontology & implant dentistry, 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
Background: Periodontal and peri-implant soft tissue management in oral rehabilitation is often necessary to achieve more esthetic and stable clinical results. This involves harvesting connective tissue from the palate. There is no consensus about the technique that will cause less postoperative pain in the donor area. Thus, this prospective cohort study compared the postoperative morbidity of two surgical techniques from the palate donor site: the free gingival graft (FGG)/de-epithelialized technique and the linear technique/subepithelial technique. Methods: Sixteen patients were randomly assigned to the FGG/de-epithelialized removal group (G1) and the removal of the connective tissue graft (CTG) with the linear/subepithelial technique group (G2). The morbidity analysis consisted of measuring the number of anti-inflammatory agents taken in the postoperative period, pain analysis through a visual analog scale, and visual analysis of healing of palatal soft tissues 1, 2, and 3 weeks after surgery. Results: The results showed that the G1 patients took more anti-inflammatory drugs (mean=9.88) than the G2 (mean=3.63) and experienced more postoperative pain (mean=6.38) than G2 (mean=3) ( Conclusion: Both techniques promoted effective healing of the palatal area; however, the removal by the linear graft technique caused less postoperative pain.
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.