Next Article in Journal
The Relationship between the Time Difference of Formation Water Infiltration Rate, Tectonic Movement, and the Formation Pressure Coefficient
Previous Article in Journal
Applying Design Thinking to Develop AI-Based Multi-Actor Decision-Support Systems: A Case Study on Human Capital Investments
Previous Article in Special Issue
Apical Transportation of Apical Foramen by Different NiTi Alloy Systems: A Systematic Review
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
This is an early access version, the complete PDF, HTML, and XML versions will be available soon.
Review

Palatal Graft Harvesting Site Healing and Pain Management: What Is the Best Choice? An Umbrella Review

Department of Medicine, Surgery and Dentistry, “Schola Medica Salernitana”, University of Salerno, Via S. Allende, 84081 Baronissi, Italy
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14(13), 5614; https://doi.org/10.3390/app14135614
Submission received: 29 May 2024 / Revised: 23 June 2024 / Accepted: 24 June 2024 / Published: 27 June 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue State-of-the-Art of Dental Materials)

Abstract

The use of free gingival graft (FGG) and connective tissue graft (CTG) from the palate are among the most predictable periodontal and peri-implant plastic surgery procedures. However, palatal harvesting causes severe discomfort in the palatal area in patients undergoing harvesting. The aim of this umbrella review is to evaluate which products or techniques can result in fewer side effects and less morbidity in patients. Systematic reviews, with meta-analysis or not, about postoperative pain and wound healing in patients undergoing surgery to remove a free gingival graft or connective tissue graft from the palatal region, published only in the English language, were electronically searched for on BioMed Central, Scopus, MEDLINE/PubMed, the Cochrane library databases, and PROSPERO register. Of 1153 titles, only 7 articles were included in this review. The reviews included suggest that the more effective interventions for patient-reported outcomes, particularly for pain management, are cyanoacrylate adhesives, platelet-rich fibrin, hyaluronic acid, and the use of palatal stents. Low-level laser therapy also demonstrated good results in palatal wound healing speed after FGG procedures. Also, topical agents were also described. Future studies and more high-quality randomized clinical trials are needed to provide clear descriptions and standardized procedures of interventions to obtain clear results.
Keywords: free gingival graft; wound healing; palate pain; connective tissue graft free gingival graft; wound healing; palate pain; connective tissue graft

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

D’Ambrosio, F.; Caggiano, M.; Chiacchio, A.; Acerra, A.; Giordano, F. Palatal Graft Harvesting Site Healing and Pain Management: What Is the Best Choice? An Umbrella Review. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 5614. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14135614

AMA Style

D’Ambrosio F, Caggiano M, Chiacchio A, Acerra A, Giordano F. Palatal Graft Harvesting Site Healing and Pain Management: What Is the Best Choice? An Umbrella Review. Applied Sciences. 2024; 14(13):5614. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14135614

Chicago/Turabian Style

D’Ambrosio, Francesco, Mario Caggiano, Andrea Chiacchio, Alfonso Acerra, and Francesco Giordano. 2024. "Palatal Graft Harvesting Site Healing and Pain Management: What Is the Best Choice? An Umbrella Review" Applied Sciences 14, no. 13: 5614. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14135614

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop