ArticleBDJ open2025
The effect of nano-bio fusion gingival gel versus palatal stent on the palatal wound healing after harvesting free gingival graft: a randomized controlled clinical trial.
Article in BDJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
The Effect of Nano-Bio Fusion Gingival Gel Versus Natural Healing on the Palatal Wound Healing After Harvesting Free Gingival Graft.
Effect of Frankincense Versus Palatal Stent on Palatal Donor Site Healing: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical Outcomes Associated with a Propolis-Based Nano-Formulated Bioadhesive Oral Gel: A Retrospective Case Series and Non-Randomized Controlled Study in Patients with Intellectual Disabilities.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Clinical Applications and Therapeutic Potential of Nano-Bio Fusion Gel in Oral Soft Tissue Therapy: A Critical Narrative Review.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study aimed to compare two different approaches for palatal wound healing following free gingival graft (FGG) harvesting: one involving Nano Bio-Fusion (NBF) gingival gel used in conjunction with a palatal stent, and the other using a palatal stent alone. Outcomes were assessed in terms of wound healing, post-operative pain, and patient satisfaction.
methodsThis parallel-grouped, two-arm, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial (RCT) included twenty-six patients with mucogingival defects that required harvesting an epithelialized free gingival graft (FGG). Patients were randomly allocated into either test group (NBF gingival gel and palatal stent; n = 13) or control group (palatal stent only; n = 13). Wound healing, the primary outcome, was evaluated over a 30-day period, while secondary outcomes included post-operative pain-measured using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and analgesic consumption-and patient satisfaction.
resultsIn the test group, wound healing showed statistically significant higher healing index score than control group after 3 days (P = 0.017), then no statistical significance was noted. Regarding post-operative pain, the test group showed statistically significantly lower pain scores (VAS) than control group in the first week, followed by no statistical significance in the second week. In the third day, the test group showed statistically significant lower analgesic consumption dose (P = 0.024) with overall statistically significant higher satisfaction score than control group (P = 0.002).
conclusionWithin the limitations of this study, the results suggest that NBF gingival gel may promote early-stage palatal wound healing, reduce postoperative pain and analgesic consumption during the first week, and enhance overall patient satisfaction. CLINICAL
trial registration(NCT05442359 | | https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ 30-June-2022).
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.