ArticleClinical and experimental dental research2026
Effect of Suturing and Adhesive Fixation on Free Gingival Graft Stability: An Ex-Vivo Porcine-Model Study.
Article in Clinical and experimental dental research, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesClinician expertise influences approach choices, amidst ongoing research on suturing techniques' biomechanical effects on graft stability. This study evaluated different suturing methods and cyanoacrylate adhesive for FGG fixation with a porcine mandible model. MATERIAL AND
methodsNinety-four FGG procedures were performed on juvenile pig mandibles. Eight fixation methods were evaluated: seven suturing techniques-Cross Compression (CC), Vertical Circumferential Compression (VCC), Horizontal (H), CC + H, VCC + H, Miller (MIL), Holbrook and Ochsenbein (Chan et al.)-and cyanoacrylate adhesive (GLU). Outcomes measured included marginal tension (vertical displacement force) and lateral tension (horizontal displacement) at the graft margin.
resultsThe HOC technique demonstrated the highest marginal stability (3.82 (SD 1.35 N) and compressive resistance (0.76 (SD 0.48 N). CC + H and VCC + H also showed significantly enhanced marginal stability. Compared to MIL, HOC exhibited superior compressive resistance (p = 0.001), while both HOC and CC + H achieved significantly greater marginal tension (p < 0.05). Graft dimensions influenced outcomes: greater graft height improved compressive resistance, while increased length reduced marginal stability with horizontal sutures. Mean suturing time was 4.84 min (SD 1.55); CC was faster than MIL (p = 0.03), whereas HOC, CC + H, and VCC + H required significantly more time (p < 0.01). GLU achieved marginal stability (3.45 (SD 3.2 N) comparable to HOC.
conclusionsWithin the limitations of this ex vivo study, suturing technique and graft dimensions significantly affect the FGG's biomechanical stability. Holbrook and Ochsenbein's suturing technique achieved the highest marginal stability and compressive resistance. Furthermore, tissue adhesive demonstrated comparable performance to conventional sutures, supporting its potential as an alternative fixation method.
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.