ArticleThe Saudi dental journal2026
Management of isolated gingival recession defects using platelet rich fibrin and amnio-chorion membrane in coronally advanced flap: an in-vivo study.
Article in The Saudi dental journal, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gingival recession is a highly prevalent mucogingival condition that can significantly compromise oral health and esthetics. Patients commonly suffer from dentinal hypersensitivity, root caries, poor esthetics, discomfort during brushing, and in severe cases tooth mobility or tooth loss, ultimately affecting their quality of life. To compare the effectiveness of Platelet Rich Fibrin (PRF) and Amnio-Chorion Membrane (ACM) with Coronally Advanced Flap (CAF) to manage the case of isolated gingival recession defects (GRD). The study is a split-mouth randomised trial that included 13 patients (n = 26) with bilateral Miller Class 1 or 2 maxilla anterior and premolar recession of the gingiva. The randomizing of locations was also done to 13 sites in each group of either Group I (CAF+ PRF, n = 13) or Group II (CAF +ACM, n = 13). At 6 months follow-up, plaque Index (PI), Gingival Index (GI), Probing pocket depth (PPD), gingival recession depth (GRD), Clinical attachment level (CAL), Keratinized gingiva width (WKG), Percentage of root coverage, and root coverage Esthetic score (RES) were measured. All data were analyzed in the SPSS v21.0 software; paired t-tests and unpaired t-tests were used for comparing the intragroup and intergroup respectively. The level of statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05. At 6 months, statistically significant improvements in PRF and CAM in all clinical parameters was seen. Root coverage of Group I was 78.84 ± 19.13 and Group II was 74.99 ± 15.59. Intergroup comparisons showed no statistically significance in clinical outcome, RES or root coverage percentage (p > 0.05). PRF and ACM had both positive outcomes on gingival thickness, WKG, and CAL. PRF or ACM resulted in significant improvement in clinical periodontal parameters, root coverage, and esthetic outcomes, with no statistically significant difference between the two groups.
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.