ArticleInternational journal of dentistry2025
Clinical Evaluation of Ozone Gel Versus Hyaluronic Acid Gel on Palatal Wound Following Free Gingival Graft Harvesting: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Article in International journal of dentistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Management of Peri-Implant Soft Tissue Dehiscence Using Laterally Closed Tunneling With a Connective Tissue Graft: A Case Report.Clinical case reports · 2026Article
- Clinical Evaluation of Ozone Gel Versus Hyaluronic Acid Gel on Palatal Wound Following Free Gingival Graft Harvesting: A Randomized Clinical Trial.International journal of dentistry · 2025Article
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
Objective: This randomized clinical trial (RCT) compares the effectiveness of ozone gel (GeliO3) and hyaluronic acid (HA) gel (Gengigel) in enhancing wound healing and reducing postoperative discomfort following free gingival graft (FGG) harvesting. Methods: Fifty-six patients requiring FGG for mucogingival defects were randomly assigned into two groups: the ozone gel group and the HA gel group. The primary outcome was postoperative pain, assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS) and analgesic consumption. Secondary outcomes included wound healing, evaluated using the Landry healing index, and color match assessment. Data were analyzed using appropriate statistical tests with a significance level of Results: Both treatment groups exhibited significant pain reduction over time ( Conclusion: Both ozone gel and HA gel effectively enhanced post-FGG healing, reduced pain, and improved tissue esthetics. Ozone therapy showed potential advantages in early pain relief and lower analgesic dependence. These findings suggest that ozone therapy may serve as an alternative or adjunctive treatment for palatal wound management in periodontal surgery. Further research is needed to confirm its clinical superiority over HA gel.
Indexed as
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.