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

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundThe 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.