Effects of non-thermal atmospheric pressure plasma on palatal wound healing of free gingival grafts: a randomized controlled clinical trial

Pekbağrıyanık, Tuğba; Dadas, Fadime Kaya; Enhoş, Şükrü

doi:10.1007/s00784-021-03925-5

Cited by 11 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nine RCTs were included in the pairwise meta-analysis (Bitencourt et al, 2022;Castro-Gaspar et al, 2021;Femminella et al, 2016;Hassan et al, 2020;Işler et al, 2019;Morshedzadeh et al, 2022;Patarapongsanti et al, 2019;Pekbagriyanik et al, 2021;Yilmaz, Comerdov, et al, 2022) and 7 RCTs were included in NMA (Bitencourt et al, 2022;Femminella et al, 2016;Hassan et al, 2020;Işler et al, 2019;Morshedzadeh et al, 2022;Patarapongsanti et al, 2019;Pekbagriyanik et al, 2021) for pain assessment (using Seven RCTs were included in pairwise meta-analysis (Alvarez-Medina et al, 2023;Femminella et al, 2016;Heidari et al, 2017;Isler et al, 2018;Morshedzadeh et al, 2022;Patarapongsanti et al, 2019;Pekbagriyanik et al, 2021) and 8 RCTs were include in NMA (open loop of evidence) (Alpan & Cin, 2023;Heidari et al, 2017;Isler et al, 2018;Miguel, Mathias-Santamaria, Rossato, Ferraz, Figueiredo-Neto, et al, 2021, Miguel, Mathias-Santamaria, Rossato, Ferraz, Rangel, et al, 2021Morshedzadeh et al, 2022;Pekbagriyanik et al, 2021;Yilmaz, Kayaalti-Yuksek, & Karaduman, 2022) for the palatal wound complete epithelialization evaluation (using hydrogen peroxide test) after 14-and 21-day. Pairwise meta-analysis for pain assessment and wound healing were reported in the Appendix S1.…”

Section: Results Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nine RCTs were included in the pairwise meta‐analysis (Bitencourt et al., 2022; Castro‐Gaspar et al., 2021; Femminella et al., 2016; Hassan et al., 2020; Işler et al., 2019; Morshedzadeh et al., 2022; Patarapongsanti et al., 2019; Pekbagriyanik et al., 2021; Yilmaz, Comerdov, et al., 2022) and 7 RCTs were included in NMA (Bitencourt et al., 2022; Femminella et al., 2016; Hassan et al., 2020; Işler et al., 2019; Morshedzadeh et al., 2022; Patarapongsanti et al., 2019; Pekbagriyanik et al., 2021) for pain assessment (using VAS) at 1, 3 and 7 days of post‐operative. A direct comparison between cyanoacrylate with the other interventions linked in the evidence network was not possible, consequently, to ensure a closed loop of evidence in NMA for pain assessment, the studies of Yilmaz, Kayaalti‐Yuksek, and Karaduman (2022) and Castro‐Gaspar et al.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Seven RCTs were included in pairwise meta‐analysis (Alvarez‐Medina et al., 2023; Femminella et al., 2016; Heidari et al., 2017; Isler et al., 2018; Morshedzadeh et al., 2022; Patarapongsanti et al., 2019; Pekbagriyanik et al., 2021) and 8 RCTs were include in NMA (open loop of evidence) (Alpan & Cin, 2023; Heidari et al., 2017; Isler et al., 2018; Miguel, Mathias‐Santamaria, Rossato, Ferraz, Figueiredo‐Neto, et al., 2021, Miguel, Mathias‐Santamaria, Rossato, Ferraz, Rangel, et al., 2021; Morshedzadeh et al., 2022; Pekbagriyanik et al., 2021; Yilmaz, Kayaalti‐Yuksek, & Karaduman, 2022) for the palatal wound complete epithelialization evaluation (using hydrogen peroxide test) after 14‐ and 21‐day. Pairwise meta‐analysis for pain assessment and wound healing were reported in the Appendix S1.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Wound‐healing agents for palatal donor area: A network meta‐analysis

Oliveira,

da Silveira,

Soares

et al. 2024

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe aim of this systematic review and network meta‐analysis (NMA) was to assess the efficacy of different wound‐healing agents for palatal donor area management after soft tissue graft harvesting.MethodsElectronic searches in six databases were conducted for publications up to October 2023. Studies with data from patients undergoing therapeutic approaches using agents for palatal healing after gingival graft harvesting were included. Data about postoperative pain, wound‐healing and postoperative complications reported for each agent were extracted. Three different tools were used for the risk of bias within studies evaluation (Murad tool for case series and case report, RoB 2.0 tool for randomized studies and ROBINS‐I tool for non‐randomized studies). A Bayesian random effects NMA was conducted for postoperative pain levels and wound healing.ResultsEighty‐four publications were included in the systematic review (qualitative analysis), with 14 of these subjected to NMA (quantitative analysis). The summarized results from the qualitative and quantitative analysis showed that all wound‐healing agents evaluated promoted better pain control and wound healing compared to spontaneous healing and hemostatic sponges alone. The NMA outcomes reveal that leucocyte‐ and platelet‐rich fibrin (L‐PRF) was the most effective agent in reducing postoperative pain in all analyzed periods. Moreover, the L‐PRF seems to accelerate wound healing and reduce postoperative complications compared to other agents.ConclusionIn conclusion, the L‐PRF was the most effective agent in reducing postoperative pain, accelerating wound healing and reducing postoperative complications after harvesting soft tissue grafts from the palatal area.

show abstract

Section: Results Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Wound‐healing agents for palatal donor area: A network meta‐analysis

Oliveira,

da Silveira,

Soares

et al. 2024

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In recent years, the use of Non-Invasive Physical Plasma (NIPP), a highly reactive and electrically conductive gas at room temperature, has been shown to have an overall beneficial effect on gingival wound healing [ 23 , 24 ]. In addition to its wound-healing effects, it is also known to reduce the bacterial load in chronic wounds [ 25 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, NIPP has been applied after subgingival instrumentation in periodontally diseased patients [ 28 ]. Furthermore, NIPP can be used for wound healing after the transplantation of palatal soft tissues (free gingival grafts) [ 24 ]. In addition, NIPP could also be used for the healing of avulsed teeth, since we have shown beneficial effects of NIPP on regeneration-associated cementoblast functions [ 29 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modulation of Inflammatory Responses by a Non-Invasive Physical Plasma Jet during Gingival Wound Healing

Eggers

Stope

Marciniak

et al. 2022

Cells

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gingival wound healing plays an important role in the treatment of a variety of inflammatory diseases. In some cases, however, wound healing is delayed by various endogenous or exogenous factors. In recent years, non-invasive physical plasma (NIPP), a highly reactive gas, has become the focus of research, because of its anti-inflammatory and wound healing-promoting efficacy. So far, since NIPP application has been poorly elucidated in dentistry, the aim of this study was to further investigate the effect of NIPP on various molecules associated with inflammation and wound healing in gingival cells. Human gingival fibroblasts (HGF) and human gingival keratinocytes (HGK) were treated with NIPP at different application times. Cell viability and cell morphology were assessed using DAPI/phalloidin staining. Cyclooxygenase (COX)2; tumour necrosis factor (TNF); CC Motif Chemokine Ligand (CCL)2; and interleukin (IL)1B, IL6 and IL8 were analysed at the mRNA and protein level by a real-time PCR and ELISA. NIPP did not cause any damage to the cells. Furthermore, NIPP led to a downregulation of proinflammatory molecules. Our study shows that NIPP application does not damage the gingival tissue and that the promotion of wound healing is also due to an anti-inflammatory component.

show abstract