ArticleNaunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology2026
Drug-induced gingival overgrowth: evaluation of an online survey.
Article in Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Drug-induced gingival overgrowth (DIGO) is becoming an increasingly important issue due to high prescription rates of inducing pharmaceuticals. Therefore, the main focus of this study was to determine what experiences dentists in Germany have had with DIGO and which active ingredients cause this ADR in their patients. The conducted online survey was sent to all 17 German dental associations asking them to forward the survey to their members. Five associations complied with the request. Out of 25,562 dentists who were potentially eligible, 118 questionnaires were evaluated, resulting in a response rate of 0.46%. Furthermore, the 24 questions were designed to shed light on the frequency with which this adverse drug reaction (ADR) occurs, as well as patient factors, treatment strategies and potential risks. Amlodipine, nifedipine and ciclosporin were cited as the most frequent triggers of DIGO. In addition, no gender-specific differences were found among the affected patients. Sixty-nine percent of respondents were able to successfully treat this condition, using the following treatment options in descending order: "oral hygiene instruction", "change in medication", and "surgical procedures". Accordingly, it is difficult to determine a precise prevalence with which a particular active substance leads to gingival overgrowth. It is therefore advisable to specify a narrow percentage range with which the prevalence can be reliably described. In addition, the underlying parameters of the source under consideration should be examined very carefully, as different sources may come to very different results.
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.