Microcurrent electrotherapy improves palatal wound healing: Randomized clinical trial

Author(s):Show less -

Viana Miguel, Manuela Maria ^[1] ; Mathias-Santamaria, Ingrid Fernandes ^{[1, 2]} ; Rossato, Amanda ^[1] ; Ferreira Ferraz, Lais Fernanda ^[1] ; Figueiredo-Neto, Antonio Martins ^[2] ; de Marco, Andrea Carvalho ^[1] ; Viana Casarin, Renato Correa ^[3] ; Wallet, Shannon Margaret ^[4] ; Tatakis, Dimitris N. ^[5] ; Mathias, Marcio Antonio ^[6] ; Santamaria, Mauro Pedrine ^[1]

Affiliation

^[1] Sao Paulo State Univ, Inst Sci & Technol, Unesp, Div Periodont, Av Eng Francisco Jose Longo 777, BR-12245000 Sao Jose Dos Campos, SP - Brazil

^[2] Natl Inst Sci & Technol Complex Fluids, Sao Paulo - Brazil

^[3] Univ Campinas Piracicaba, Dent Sch Piracicaba, Dept Prosthodont & Periodont, Div Periodont, Sao Paulo - Brazil

^[4] Univ N Carolina, Sch Dent, Chapel Hill, NC 27515 - USA

^[5] Ohio State Univ, Coll Dent, Div Periodontol, Columbus, OH 43210 - USA

^[6] FEI Univ, Dept Elect Engn, Sao Bernardo Do Campo, SP - Brazil

• Document type: Journal article
• Source: Journal of Periodontology; v. 92, n. 2 AUG 2020.
• Web of Science Citations: 1

Abstract

Background This study was conducted to assess the clinical, immunological, and patient-centered outcomes of microcurrent electrotherapy on palatal wound healing. Methods This was a parallel, double-masked randomized clinical trial, in which 53 patients with ridge preservation indications were selected and randomly assigned to one of two groups. In the control (sham) group (n = 27), palatal wounds, after free gingival grafts (FGG) harvest, received sham application of electrotherapy. In the test (electrotherapy treatment {[}EE]) group (n = 26), palatal wounds, after FGG harvest, received application of microcurrent electrotherapy protocol. Clinical parameters, patient-centered outcomes, and inflammatory markers were evaluated, up to 90 days postoperatively. Results The EE group achieved earlier wound closure (P <0.001) and epithelialization (P P = 0.03) at 7 and 14 days after harvest when compared with the sham group. Painful symptomatology was reported less frequently in the EE group than in the sham group at 3-day follow-up (P = 0.008). Likewise, an improvement in Oral Health Impact Profile was reported 2 days after the procedure by the EE group (P = 0.04). In addition, favorable modulation of inflammatory wound healing markers occurred when electrotherapy was applied. Conclusion Within the limits of the present study, it can be concluded that the use of a low-intensity electrotherapy protocol may accelerate palatal wound healing and decrease patient discomfort after FGG harvest. (AU)

• FAPESP's process: 18/03353-5 - Influence of electric stimulation on palatal wound healing: randomized clinical trial
• Grantee: Manuela Maria Viana Miguel
• Support Opportunities: Scholarships in Brazil - Master
• FAPESP's process: 18/07340-5 - Structural characterisation of lipoproteins
• Grantee: Zahra Lotfollahi
• Support Opportunities: Scholarships in Brazil - Post-Doctoral
• FAPESP's process: 16/16102-5 - Periodontal plastic surgery: assessment of periodontal wound healing immunology and randomized clinical trial for the development of new treatment protocol
• Grantee: Mauro Pedrine Santamaria
• Support Opportunities: Regular Research Grants
• FAPESP's process: 16/07528-9 - Electrical stimulation effect on coronally advanced flap for the treatment of gingival recession: randomized controlled clinical trial
• Grantee: Felipe Lucas da Silva Neves
• Support Opportunities: Scholarships in Brazil - Doctorate
• FAPESP's process: 16/24531-3 - Structural and biophysics properties of native and modified lipoproteins
• Grantee: Antonio Martins Figueiredo Neto
• Support Opportunities: Research Projects - Thematic Grants
• FAPESP's process: 14/50983-3 - INCT 2014: complex fluids
• Grantee: Antonio Martins Figueiredo Neto
• Support Opportunities: Research Projects - Thematic Grants