ArticleMaxillofacial plastic and reconstructive surgery2026
Postoperative discomfort following inverted periosteal pedicle graft versus subepithelial connective tissue graft for treating gingival recession RT1 & RT2: a randomized clinical trial.
Article in Maxillofacial plastic and reconstructive surgery, 2026. 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
backgroundDespite being the most predictable root coverage technique, coronally advanced flap with subepithelial connective tissue graft (CAF + SCTG) necessitates graft harvesting from a second surgical site; increasing patient’s post-operative discomfort. Besides, due to the promising regenerative capacity of the periosteum and omitting the need for a second surgical site, periosteal pedicle graft (PPG) is tested as an alternative technique. Eighteen RT1 and RT2 gingival recession defects were randomly assigned to receive either CAF + SCTG or inverted PPG (iPPG). Postoperative discomfort, recession depth, and patient’s satisfaction were assessed within 6-months of follow-up.
resultsPatients in the iPPG group reported postoperative discomfort (VAS) of (2.28 ± 0.83) compared to (3.11 ± 1.17) in SCTG group; with no statistically significant difference. Clinically, the mean recession depth was significantly decreased from baseline in iPPG group (from 3.78 ± 0.67 to 0.56 ± 0.53) and in SCTG group (from 3.89 ± 0.78 to 0.33 ± 0.5). Lastly, iPPG showed significantly higher level of patients’ satisfaction compared to SCTG.
conclusionsiPPG can be a promising alternative to SCTG for root coverage with significantly increased patient’s satisfaction after six months and comparable clinical root coverage parameters.
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.