Diode laser surgery versus electrocautery in the treatment of inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia: a randomized double-blind clinical trial
Objectives To compare the efficacy and safety of diode laser and electrocautery techniques for inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia (IFH) removal. Materials and methods In this randomized double-blind clinical trial, 40 individuals were randomly allocated to two groups: group 1 (G1) consisted of 20 indi...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
de Jesus, Alessandro Oliveira [verfasserIn] Matias, Michelle Danielle Porto [verfasserIn] de Arruda, José Alcides Almeida [verfasserIn] Aires, Amanda Vieira [verfasserIn] Gomes, Isadora Pereira [verfasserIn] Souza, Leandro Napier [verfasserIn] Abreu, Lucas Guimarães [verfasserIn] Mesquita, Ricardo Alves [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2020 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Clinical Oral Investigations - Springer-Verlag, 2001, 24(2020), 12 vom: 30. Apr., Seite 4325-4334 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:24 ; year:2020 ; number:12 ; day:30 ; month:04 ; pages:4325-4334 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1007/s00784-020-03296-3 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
SPR041990331 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | SPR041990331 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20201126070347.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 201115s2020 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s00784-020-03296-3 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)SPR041990331 | ||
| 035 | |a (SPR)s00784-020-03296-3-e | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a de Jesus, Alessandro Oliveira |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Diode laser surgery versus electrocautery in the treatment of inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia: a randomized double-blind clinical trial |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2020 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Objectives To compare the efficacy and safety of diode laser and electrocautery techniques for inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia (IFH) removal. Materials and methods In this randomized double-blind clinical trial, 40 individuals were randomly allocated to two groups: group 1 (G1) consisted of 20 individuals assigned to treatment with diode laser and group 2 (G2) consisted of 20 individuals assigned to treatment with electrocautery. The following transoperative parameters were evaluated: bleeding, temperature, and surgical technique parameters (energy deposited on tissue, flow rate, and time of incision). The postoperative parameters evaluated were as follows: pain, functional alterations (chewing, speaking), analgesic medication intake, swelling, healing of the wound area, and patient satisfaction. Results Among the 40 individuals included in the study, four (two in G1 and two in G2) did not complete the entire follow-up. Therefore, 36 individuals (18 in G1 and 18 in G2) participated. Participants in G1 and in G2 had similar demographic characteristics. No difference regarding the trans- or postoperative parameters evaluated was observed between G1 and G2 (p > 0.05). Also, no difference regarding the time for healing was observed between groups. Conclusions Diode laser seems to be as effective and safe as electrocautery when applied under similar conditions for IFH removal. Clinical relevance IFH corresponds to 65% of the lesions observed in denture wearers. This study shows that under similar conditions diode laser is as effective and safe as electrocautery for removal of IFH. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Cautery |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Clinical trial |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Diode laser |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Hyperplasia |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Matias, Michelle Danielle Porto |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a de Arruda, José Alcides Almeida |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Aires, Amanda Vieira |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Gomes, Isadora Pereira |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Souza, Leandro Napier |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Abreu, Lucas Guimarães |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Mesquita, Ricardo Alves |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Clinical Oral Investigations |d Springer-Verlag, 2001 |g 24(2020), 12 vom: 30. Apr., Seite 4325-4334 |w (DE-627)SPR007794231 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:24 |g year:2020 |g number:12 |g day:30 |g month:04 |g pages:4325-4334 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03296-3 |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_SPRINGER | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 24 |j 2020 |e 12 |b 30 |c 04 |h 4325-4334 | ||
| author_variant |
j a o d jao jaod m d p m mdp mdpm a j a a d ajaa ajaad a v a av ava i p g ip ipg l n s ln lns l g a lg lga r a m ra ram |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
dejesusalessandrooliveiramatiasmichelled:2020----:idlsrugrvrueetoatriteramnoifamtrfbosyepaiaa |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2020 |
| publishDate |
2020 |
| allfields |
10.1007/s00784-020-03296-3 doi (DE-627)SPR041990331 (SPR)s00784-020-03296-3-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng de Jesus, Alessandro Oliveira verfasserin aut Diode laser surgery versus electrocautery in the treatment of inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia: a randomized double-blind clinical trial 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Objectives To compare the efficacy and safety of diode laser and electrocautery techniques for inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia (IFH) removal. Materials and methods In this randomized double-blind clinical trial, 40 individuals were randomly allocated to two groups: group 1 (G1) consisted of 20 individuals assigned to treatment with diode laser and group 2 (G2) consisted of 20 individuals assigned to treatment with electrocautery. The following transoperative parameters were evaluated: bleeding, temperature, and surgical technique parameters (energy deposited on tissue, flow rate, and time of incision). The postoperative parameters evaluated were as follows: pain, functional alterations (chewing, speaking), analgesic medication intake, swelling, healing of the wound area, and patient satisfaction. Results Among the 40 individuals included in the study, four (two in G1 and two in G2) did not complete the entire follow-up. Therefore, 36 individuals (18 in G1 and 18 in G2) participated. Participants in G1 and in G2 had similar demographic characteristics. No difference regarding the trans- or postoperative parameters evaluated was observed between G1 and G2 (p > 0.05). Also, no difference regarding the time for healing was observed between groups. Conclusions Diode laser seems to be as effective and safe as electrocautery when applied under similar conditions for IFH removal. Clinical relevance IFH corresponds to 65% of the lesions observed in denture wearers. This study shows that under similar conditions diode laser is as effective and safe as electrocautery for removal of IFH. Cautery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Clinical trial (dpeaa)DE-He213 Diode laser (dpeaa)DE-He213 Hyperplasia (dpeaa)DE-He213 Matias, Michelle Danielle Porto verfasserin aut de Arruda, José Alcides Almeida verfasserin aut Aires, Amanda Vieira verfasserin aut Gomes, Isadora Pereira verfasserin aut Souza, Leandro Napier verfasserin aut Abreu, Lucas Guimarães verfasserin aut Mesquita, Ricardo Alves verfasserin aut Enthalten in Clinical Oral Investigations Springer-Verlag, 2001 24(2020), 12 vom: 30. Apr., Seite 4325-4334 (DE-627)SPR007794231 nnns volume:24 year:2020 number:12 day:30 month:04 pages:4325-4334 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03296-3 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 24 2020 12 30 04 4325-4334 |
| spelling |
10.1007/s00784-020-03296-3 doi (DE-627)SPR041990331 (SPR)s00784-020-03296-3-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng de Jesus, Alessandro Oliveira verfasserin aut Diode laser surgery versus electrocautery in the treatment of inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia: a randomized double-blind clinical trial 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Objectives To compare the efficacy and safety of diode laser and electrocautery techniques for inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia (IFH) removal. Materials and methods In this randomized double-blind clinical trial, 40 individuals were randomly allocated to two groups: group 1 (G1) consisted of 20 individuals assigned to treatment with diode laser and group 2 (G2) consisted of 20 individuals assigned to treatment with electrocautery. The following transoperative parameters were evaluated: bleeding, temperature, and surgical technique parameters (energy deposited on tissue, flow rate, and time of incision). The postoperative parameters evaluated were as follows: pain, functional alterations (chewing, speaking), analgesic medication intake, swelling, healing of the wound area, and patient satisfaction. Results Among the 40 individuals included in the study, four (two in G1 and two in G2) did not complete the entire follow-up. Therefore, 36 individuals (18 in G1 and 18 in G2) participated. Participants in G1 and in G2 had similar demographic characteristics. No difference regarding the trans- or postoperative parameters evaluated was observed between G1 and G2 (p > 0.05). Also, no difference regarding the time for healing was observed between groups. Conclusions Diode laser seems to be as effective and safe as electrocautery when applied under similar conditions for IFH removal. Clinical relevance IFH corresponds to 65% of the lesions observed in denture wearers. This study shows that under similar conditions diode laser is as effective and safe as electrocautery for removal of IFH. Cautery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Clinical trial (dpeaa)DE-He213 Diode laser (dpeaa)DE-He213 Hyperplasia (dpeaa)DE-He213 Matias, Michelle Danielle Porto verfasserin aut de Arruda, José Alcides Almeida verfasserin aut Aires, Amanda Vieira verfasserin aut Gomes, Isadora Pereira verfasserin aut Souza, Leandro Napier verfasserin aut Abreu, Lucas Guimarães verfasserin aut Mesquita, Ricardo Alves verfasserin aut Enthalten in Clinical Oral Investigations Springer-Verlag, 2001 24(2020), 12 vom: 30. Apr., Seite 4325-4334 (DE-627)SPR007794231 nnns volume:24 year:2020 number:12 day:30 month:04 pages:4325-4334 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03296-3 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 24 2020 12 30 04 4325-4334 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1007/s00784-020-03296-3 doi (DE-627)SPR041990331 (SPR)s00784-020-03296-3-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng de Jesus, Alessandro Oliveira verfasserin aut Diode laser surgery versus electrocautery in the treatment of inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia: a randomized double-blind clinical trial 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Objectives To compare the efficacy and safety of diode laser and electrocautery techniques for inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia (IFH) removal. Materials and methods In this randomized double-blind clinical trial, 40 individuals were randomly allocated to two groups: group 1 (G1) consisted of 20 individuals assigned to treatment with diode laser and group 2 (G2) consisted of 20 individuals assigned to treatment with electrocautery. The following transoperative parameters were evaluated: bleeding, temperature, and surgical technique parameters (energy deposited on tissue, flow rate, and time of incision). The postoperative parameters evaluated were as follows: pain, functional alterations (chewing, speaking), analgesic medication intake, swelling, healing of the wound area, and patient satisfaction. Results Among the 40 individuals included in the study, four (two in G1 and two in G2) did not complete the entire follow-up. Therefore, 36 individuals (18 in G1 and 18 in G2) participated. Participants in G1 and in G2 had similar demographic characteristics. No difference regarding the trans- or postoperative parameters evaluated was observed between G1 and G2 (p > 0.05). Also, no difference regarding the time for healing was observed between groups. Conclusions Diode laser seems to be as effective and safe as electrocautery when applied under similar conditions for IFH removal. Clinical relevance IFH corresponds to 65% of the lesions observed in denture wearers. This study shows that under similar conditions diode laser is as effective and safe as electrocautery for removal of IFH. Cautery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Clinical trial (dpeaa)DE-He213 Diode laser (dpeaa)DE-He213 Hyperplasia (dpeaa)DE-He213 Matias, Michelle Danielle Porto verfasserin aut de Arruda, José Alcides Almeida verfasserin aut Aires, Amanda Vieira verfasserin aut Gomes, Isadora Pereira verfasserin aut Souza, Leandro Napier verfasserin aut Abreu, Lucas Guimarães verfasserin aut Mesquita, Ricardo Alves verfasserin aut Enthalten in Clinical Oral Investigations Springer-Verlag, 2001 24(2020), 12 vom: 30. Apr., Seite 4325-4334 (DE-627)SPR007794231 nnns volume:24 year:2020 number:12 day:30 month:04 pages:4325-4334 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03296-3 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 24 2020 12 30 04 4325-4334 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1007/s00784-020-03296-3 doi (DE-627)SPR041990331 (SPR)s00784-020-03296-3-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng de Jesus, Alessandro Oliveira verfasserin aut Diode laser surgery versus electrocautery in the treatment of inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia: a randomized double-blind clinical trial 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Objectives To compare the efficacy and safety of diode laser and electrocautery techniques for inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia (IFH) removal. Materials and methods In this randomized double-blind clinical trial, 40 individuals were randomly allocated to two groups: group 1 (G1) consisted of 20 individuals assigned to treatment with diode laser and group 2 (G2) consisted of 20 individuals assigned to treatment with electrocautery. The following transoperative parameters were evaluated: bleeding, temperature, and surgical technique parameters (energy deposited on tissue, flow rate, and time of incision). The postoperative parameters evaluated were as follows: pain, functional alterations (chewing, speaking), analgesic medication intake, swelling, healing of the wound area, and patient satisfaction. Results Among the 40 individuals included in the study, four (two in G1 and two in G2) did not complete the entire follow-up. Therefore, 36 individuals (18 in G1 and 18 in G2) participated. Participants in G1 and in G2 had similar demographic characteristics. No difference regarding the trans- or postoperative parameters evaluated was observed between G1 and G2 (p > 0.05). Also, no difference regarding the time for healing was observed between groups. Conclusions Diode laser seems to be as effective and safe as electrocautery when applied under similar conditions for IFH removal. Clinical relevance IFH corresponds to 65% of the lesions observed in denture wearers. This study shows that under similar conditions diode laser is as effective and safe as electrocautery for removal of IFH. Cautery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Clinical trial (dpeaa)DE-He213 Diode laser (dpeaa)DE-He213 Hyperplasia (dpeaa)DE-He213 Matias, Michelle Danielle Porto verfasserin aut de Arruda, José Alcides Almeida verfasserin aut Aires, Amanda Vieira verfasserin aut Gomes, Isadora Pereira verfasserin aut Souza, Leandro Napier verfasserin aut Abreu, Lucas Guimarães verfasserin aut Mesquita, Ricardo Alves verfasserin aut Enthalten in Clinical Oral Investigations Springer-Verlag, 2001 24(2020), 12 vom: 30. Apr., Seite 4325-4334 (DE-627)SPR007794231 nnns volume:24 year:2020 number:12 day:30 month:04 pages:4325-4334 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03296-3 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 24 2020 12 30 04 4325-4334 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1007/s00784-020-03296-3 doi (DE-627)SPR041990331 (SPR)s00784-020-03296-3-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng de Jesus, Alessandro Oliveira verfasserin aut Diode laser surgery versus electrocautery in the treatment of inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia: a randomized double-blind clinical trial 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Objectives To compare the efficacy and safety of diode laser and electrocautery techniques for inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia (IFH) removal. Materials and methods In this randomized double-blind clinical trial, 40 individuals were randomly allocated to two groups: group 1 (G1) consisted of 20 individuals assigned to treatment with diode laser and group 2 (G2) consisted of 20 individuals assigned to treatment with electrocautery. The following transoperative parameters were evaluated: bleeding, temperature, and surgical technique parameters (energy deposited on tissue, flow rate, and time of incision). The postoperative parameters evaluated were as follows: pain, functional alterations (chewing, speaking), analgesic medication intake, swelling, healing of the wound area, and patient satisfaction. Results Among the 40 individuals included in the study, four (two in G1 and two in G2) did not complete the entire follow-up. Therefore, 36 individuals (18 in G1 and 18 in G2) participated. Participants in G1 and in G2 had similar demographic characteristics. No difference regarding the trans- or postoperative parameters evaluated was observed between G1 and G2 (p > 0.05). Also, no difference regarding the time for healing was observed between groups. Conclusions Diode laser seems to be as effective and safe as electrocautery when applied under similar conditions for IFH removal. Clinical relevance IFH corresponds to 65% of the lesions observed in denture wearers. This study shows that under similar conditions diode laser is as effective and safe as electrocautery for removal of IFH. Cautery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Clinical trial (dpeaa)DE-He213 Diode laser (dpeaa)DE-He213 Hyperplasia (dpeaa)DE-He213 Matias, Michelle Danielle Porto verfasserin aut de Arruda, José Alcides Almeida verfasserin aut Aires, Amanda Vieira verfasserin aut Gomes, Isadora Pereira verfasserin aut Souza, Leandro Napier verfasserin aut Abreu, Lucas Guimarães verfasserin aut Mesquita, Ricardo Alves verfasserin aut Enthalten in Clinical Oral Investigations Springer-Verlag, 2001 24(2020), 12 vom: 30. Apr., Seite 4325-4334 (DE-627)SPR007794231 nnns volume:24 year:2020 number:12 day:30 month:04 pages:4325-4334 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03296-3 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 24 2020 12 30 04 4325-4334 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Clinical Oral Investigations 24(2020), 12 vom: 30. Apr., Seite 4325-4334 volume:24 year:2020 number:12 day:30 month:04 pages:4325-4334 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Clinical Oral Investigations 24(2020), 12 vom: 30. Apr., Seite 4325-4334 volume:24 year:2020 number:12 day:30 month:04 pages:4325-4334 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Cautery Clinical trial Diode laser Hyperplasia |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Clinical Oral Investigations |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
de Jesus, Alessandro Oliveira @@aut@@ Matias, Michelle Danielle Porto @@aut@@ de Arruda, José Alcides Almeida @@aut@@ Aires, Amanda Vieira @@aut@@ Gomes, Isadora Pereira @@aut@@ Souza, Leandro Napier @@aut@@ Abreu, Lucas Guimarães @@aut@@ Mesquita, Ricardo Alves @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2020-04-30T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
SPR007794231 |
| id |
SPR041990331 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR041990331</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20201126070347.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201115s2020 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s00784-020-03296-3</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR041990331</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s00784-020-03296-3-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">de Jesus, Alessandro Oliveira</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Diode laser surgery versus electrocautery in the treatment of inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia: a randomized double-blind clinical trial</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Objectives To compare the efficacy and safety of diode laser and electrocautery techniques for inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia (IFH) removal. Materials and methods In this randomized double-blind clinical trial, 40 individuals were randomly allocated to two groups: group 1 (G1) consisted of 20 individuals assigned to treatment with diode laser and group 2 (G2) consisted of 20 individuals assigned to treatment with electrocautery. The following transoperative parameters were evaluated: bleeding, temperature, and surgical technique parameters (energy deposited on tissue, flow rate, and time of incision). The postoperative parameters evaluated were as follows: pain, functional alterations (chewing, speaking), analgesic medication intake, swelling, healing of the wound area, and patient satisfaction. Results Among the 40 individuals included in the study, four (two in G1 and two in G2) did not complete the entire follow-up. Therefore, 36 individuals (18 in G1 and 18 in G2) participated. Participants in G1 and in G2 had similar demographic characteristics. No difference regarding the trans- or postoperative parameters evaluated was observed between G1 and G2 (p > 0.05). Also, no difference regarding the time for healing was observed between groups. Conclusions Diode laser seems to be as effective and safe as electrocautery when applied under similar conditions for IFH removal. Clinical relevance IFH corresponds to 65% of the lesions observed in denture wearers. This study shows that under similar conditions diode laser is as effective and safe as electrocautery for removal of IFH.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cautery</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Clinical trial</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Diode laser</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Hyperplasia</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Matias, Michelle Danielle Porto</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">de Arruda, José Alcides Almeida</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Aires, Amanda Vieira</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Gomes, Isadora Pereira</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Souza, Leandro Napier</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abreu, Lucas Guimarães</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Mesquita, Ricardo Alves</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Clinical Oral Investigations</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer-Verlag, 2001</subfield><subfield code="g">24(2020), 12 vom: 30. Apr., Seite 4325-4334</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)SPR007794231</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:24</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2020</subfield><subfield code="g">number:12</subfield><subfield code="g">day:30</subfield><subfield code="g">month:04</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:4325-4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03296-3</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">24</subfield><subfield code="j">2020</subfield><subfield code="e">12</subfield><subfield code="b">30</subfield><subfield code="c">04</subfield><subfield code="h">4325-4334</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
de Jesus, Alessandro Oliveira |
| spellingShingle |
de Jesus, Alessandro Oliveira misc Cautery misc Clinical trial misc Diode laser misc Hyperplasia Diode laser surgery versus electrocautery in the treatment of inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia: a randomized double-blind clinical trial |
| authorStr |
de Jesus, Alessandro Oliveira |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)SPR007794231 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut |
| collection |
springer |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| topic_title |
Diode laser surgery versus electrocautery in the treatment of inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia: a randomized double-blind clinical trial Cautery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Clinical trial (dpeaa)DE-He213 Diode laser (dpeaa)DE-He213 Hyperplasia (dpeaa)DE-He213 |
| topic |
misc Cautery misc Clinical trial misc Diode laser misc Hyperplasia |
| topic_unstemmed |
misc Cautery misc Clinical trial misc Diode laser misc Hyperplasia |
| topic_browse |
misc Cautery misc Clinical trial misc Diode laser misc Hyperplasia |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Clinical Oral Investigations |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
SPR007794231 |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Clinical Oral Investigations |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)SPR007794231 |
| title |
Diode laser surgery versus electrocautery in the treatment of inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia: a randomized double-blind clinical trial |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)SPR041990331 (SPR)s00784-020-03296-3-e |
| title_full |
Diode laser surgery versus electrocautery in the treatment of inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia: a randomized double-blind clinical trial |
| author_sort |
de Jesus, Alessandro Oliveira |
| journal |
Clinical Oral Investigations |
| journalStr |
Clinical Oral Investigations |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2020 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| container_start_page |
4325 |
| author_browse |
de Jesus, Alessandro Oliveira Matias, Michelle Danielle Porto de Arruda, José Alcides Almeida Aires, Amanda Vieira Gomes, Isadora Pereira Souza, Leandro Napier Abreu, Lucas Guimarães Mesquita, Ricardo Alves |
| container_volume |
24 |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
de Jesus, Alessandro Oliveira |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1007/s00784-020-03296-3 |
| author2-role |
verfasserin |
| title_sort |
diode laser surgery versus electrocautery in the treatment of inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia: a randomized double-blind clinical trial |
| title_auth |
Diode laser surgery versus electrocautery in the treatment of inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia: a randomized double-blind clinical trial |
| abstract |
Objectives To compare the efficacy and safety of diode laser and electrocautery techniques for inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia (IFH) removal. Materials and methods In this randomized double-blind clinical trial, 40 individuals were randomly allocated to two groups: group 1 (G1) consisted of 20 individuals assigned to treatment with diode laser and group 2 (G2) consisted of 20 individuals assigned to treatment with electrocautery. The following transoperative parameters were evaluated: bleeding, temperature, and surgical technique parameters (energy deposited on tissue, flow rate, and time of incision). The postoperative parameters evaluated were as follows: pain, functional alterations (chewing, speaking), analgesic medication intake, swelling, healing of the wound area, and patient satisfaction. Results Among the 40 individuals included in the study, four (two in G1 and two in G2) did not complete the entire follow-up. Therefore, 36 individuals (18 in G1 and 18 in G2) participated. Participants in G1 and in G2 had similar demographic characteristics. No difference regarding the trans- or postoperative parameters evaluated was observed between G1 and G2 (p > 0.05). Also, no difference regarding the time for healing was observed between groups. Conclusions Diode laser seems to be as effective and safe as electrocautery when applied under similar conditions for IFH removal. Clinical relevance IFH corresponds to 65% of the lesions observed in denture wearers. This study shows that under similar conditions diode laser is as effective and safe as electrocautery for removal of IFH. |
| abstractGer |
Objectives To compare the efficacy and safety of diode laser and electrocautery techniques for inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia (IFH) removal. Materials and methods In this randomized double-blind clinical trial, 40 individuals were randomly allocated to two groups: group 1 (G1) consisted of 20 individuals assigned to treatment with diode laser and group 2 (G2) consisted of 20 individuals assigned to treatment with electrocautery. The following transoperative parameters were evaluated: bleeding, temperature, and surgical technique parameters (energy deposited on tissue, flow rate, and time of incision). The postoperative parameters evaluated were as follows: pain, functional alterations (chewing, speaking), analgesic medication intake, swelling, healing of the wound area, and patient satisfaction. Results Among the 40 individuals included in the study, four (two in G1 and two in G2) did not complete the entire follow-up. Therefore, 36 individuals (18 in G1 and 18 in G2) participated. Participants in G1 and in G2 had similar demographic characteristics. No difference regarding the trans- or postoperative parameters evaluated was observed between G1 and G2 (p > 0.05). Also, no difference regarding the time for healing was observed between groups. Conclusions Diode laser seems to be as effective and safe as electrocautery when applied under similar conditions for IFH removal. Clinical relevance IFH corresponds to 65% of the lesions observed in denture wearers. This study shows that under similar conditions diode laser is as effective and safe as electrocautery for removal of IFH. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Objectives To compare the efficacy and safety of diode laser and electrocautery techniques for inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia (IFH) removal. Materials and methods In this randomized double-blind clinical trial, 40 individuals were randomly allocated to two groups: group 1 (G1) consisted of 20 individuals assigned to treatment with diode laser and group 2 (G2) consisted of 20 individuals assigned to treatment with electrocautery. The following transoperative parameters were evaluated: bleeding, temperature, and surgical technique parameters (energy deposited on tissue, flow rate, and time of incision). The postoperative parameters evaluated were as follows: pain, functional alterations (chewing, speaking), analgesic medication intake, swelling, healing of the wound area, and patient satisfaction. Results Among the 40 individuals included in the study, four (two in G1 and two in G2) did not complete the entire follow-up. Therefore, 36 individuals (18 in G1 and 18 in G2) participated. Participants in G1 and in G2 had similar demographic characteristics. No difference regarding the trans- or postoperative parameters evaluated was observed between G1 and G2 (p > 0.05). Also, no difference regarding the time for healing was observed between groups. Conclusions Diode laser seems to be as effective and safe as electrocautery when applied under similar conditions for IFH removal. Clinical relevance IFH corresponds to 65% of the lesions observed in denture wearers. This study shows that under similar conditions diode laser is as effective and safe as electrocautery for removal of IFH. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER |
| container_issue |
12 |
| title_short |
Diode laser surgery versus electrocautery in the treatment of inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia: a randomized double-blind clinical trial |
| url |
https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03296-3 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Matias, Michelle Danielle Porto de Arruda, José Alcides Almeida Aires, Amanda Vieira Gomes, Isadora Pereira Souza, Leandro Napier Abreu, Lucas Guimarães Mesquita, Ricardo Alves |
| author2Str |
Matias, Michelle Danielle Porto de Arruda, José Alcides Almeida Aires, Amanda Vieira Gomes, Isadora Pereira Souza, Leandro Napier Abreu, Lucas Guimarães Mesquita, Ricardo Alves |
| ppnlink |
SPR007794231 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
c |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1007/s00784-020-03296-3 |
| up_date |
2024-07-04T00:23:10.848Z |
| _version_ |
1803605865502081024 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR041990331</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20201126070347.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201115s2020 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s00784-020-03296-3</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR041990331</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s00784-020-03296-3-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">de Jesus, Alessandro Oliveira</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Diode laser surgery versus electrocautery in the treatment of inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia: a randomized double-blind clinical trial</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Objectives To compare the efficacy and safety of diode laser and electrocautery techniques for inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia (IFH) removal. Materials and methods In this randomized double-blind clinical trial, 40 individuals were randomly allocated to two groups: group 1 (G1) consisted of 20 individuals assigned to treatment with diode laser and group 2 (G2) consisted of 20 individuals assigned to treatment with electrocautery. The following transoperative parameters were evaluated: bleeding, temperature, and surgical technique parameters (energy deposited on tissue, flow rate, and time of incision). The postoperative parameters evaluated were as follows: pain, functional alterations (chewing, speaking), analgesic medication intake, swelling, healing of the wound area, and patient satisfaction. Results Among the 40 individuals included in the study, four (two in G1 and two in G2) did not complete the entire follow-up. Therefore, 36 individuals (18 in G1 and 18 in G2) participated. Participants in G1 and in G2 had similar demographic characteristics. No difference regarding the trans- or postoperative parameters evaluated was observed between G1 and G2 (p > 0.05). Also, no difference regarding the time for healing was observed between groups. Conclusions Diode laser seems to be as effective and safe as electrocautery when applied under similar conditions for IFH removal. Clinical relevance IFH corresponds to 65% of the lesions observed in denture wearers. This study shows that under similar conditions diode laser is as effective and safe as electrocautery for removal of IFH.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cautery</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Clinical trial</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Diode laser</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Hyperplasia</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Matias, Michelle Danielle Porto</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">de Arruda, José Alcides Almeida</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Aires, Amanda Vieira</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Gomes, Isadora Pereira</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Souza, Leandro Napier</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abreu, Lucas Guimarães</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Mesquita, Ricardo Alves</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Clinical Oral Investigations</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer-Verlag, 2001</subfield><subfield code="g">24(2020), 12 vom: 30. Apr., Seite 4325-4334</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)SPR007794231</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:24</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2020</subfield><subfield code="g">number:12</subfield><subfield code="g">day:30</subfield><subfield code="g">month:04</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:4325-4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03296-3</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">24</subfield><subfield code="j">2020</subfield><subfield code="e">12</subfield><subfield code="b">30</subfield><subfield code="c">04</subfield><subfield code="h">4325-4334</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.4019346 |