Trial reportOdontology2026
PRF membrane vs. chorion membrane with coronally advanced flap: a clinical study on gingival recession.
Trial report in Odontology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07308405 (Comparative Clinical Evaluation of Coronally Advanced Flap With Platelet Rich Fibrin Membrane and Chorion Membrane in the Treatment of Human Gingival Recession), which is not on this 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.
Comparative Clinical Evaluation of Coronally Advanced Flap With Platelet Rich Fibrin Membrane and Chorion Membrane in the Treatment of Human Gingival Recession
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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Platelet-rich fibrin (PRF), a second-generation platelet concentrate, accelerates soft and hard tissue regeneration. Chorion membrane, of fetal origin, has wound-modulating properties. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes of PRF and chorion membrane in treating isolated Miller's class I or II gingival recession defects. Fifty recession defects in 50 patients were randomly treated with a coronally advanced flap (CAF) and PRF membrane (site A, n = 25) or CAF with chorion membrane (site B, n = 25). Clinical parameters recorded at baseline, 1, 3, and 6 months included recession depth (RD), recession width (RW), clinical attachment level (CAL), width of keratinized gingiva (WKG), plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), and gingival biotype. Statistical analysis compared outcomes across follow-up intervals. At 6 months, both groups demonstrated significant improvements in RD, RW, CAL, WKG, PI, and GI compared with baseline. Mean percentage root coverage was 86.76 ± 13.76 in the PRF group and 82.89 ± 15.65 in the chorion group, with no statistically significant difference between them. Sites with an initial thin biotype showed conversion to thick biotype in both groups. Both PRF and chorion membrane demonstrated predictable effectiveness for managing isolated recession defects, with comparable outcomes. Longitudinal studies are needed to confirm these findings.
trial registration(Clinical trial number- NCT07308405).
Indexed as
Identifiers
41545633What 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.