Microcurrent electrotherapy improves palatal wound healing: Randomized clinical trial

Manuela Maria Viana Miguel; Ingrid Fernandes Mathias-Santamaria; Amanda Rossato; Laís Fernanda Ferreira Ferraz; Antônio Martins Figueiredo-Neto; Andrea Carvalho de Marco; Renato Corrêa Viana Casarin; Shannon Margaret Wallet; Dimitris N. Tatakis; Marcio Antonio Mathias; Mauro Pedrine Santamaria

doi:10.1002/JPER.20-0122

Microcurrent electrotherapy improves palatal wound healing: Randomized clinical trial

Manuela Maria Viana Miguel, Ingrid Fernandes Mathias-Santamaria, Amanda Rossato, Laís Fernanda Ferreira Ferraz, Antônio Martins Figueiredo-Neto, Andrea Carvalho de Marco, Renato Corrêa Viana Casarin, Shannon Margaret Wallet, Dimitris N. Tatakis, Marcio Antonio Mathias, Mauro Pedrine Santamaria

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

18 Scopus citations

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 <0.05; 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.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	244-253
Number of pages	10
Journal	Journal of Periodontology
Volume	92
Issue number	2
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1002/JPER.20-0122
State	Published - Feb 2021

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 American Academy of Periodontology

Funding

The authors appreciate the financial support provided by Research Funding Agency from São Paulo State (FAPESP), Brazil, grants #2018/03353‐5, 2016/07528‐9, and 2016/16102‐5. In addition, this study was financed in part by the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES), Brazil – Finance Code 001. The work was also supported by the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development from Brazil, National Institute of Science and Technology Complex Fluids (INCT‐FCx: 2014/50983‐3), (NAP‐FCx: 2011.1.9358.1.6) and São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP ‒2018/07340‐5 & 2016/24531‐3). Dr Mauro Santamaria is supported by the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development from Brazil, CNPq (grant # 304269/2019‐0). The authors report no conflict of interest related to this study. The authors appreciate the financial support provided by Research Funding Agency from S?o Paulo State (FAPESP), Brazil, grants #2018/03353-5, 2016/07528-9, and 2016/16102-5. In addition, this study was financed in part by the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES), Brazil ? Finance Code 001. The work was also supported by the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development from Brazil, National Institute of Science and Technology Complex Fluids (INCT-FCx: 2014/50983-3), (NAP-FCx: 2011.1.9358.1.6) and S?o Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP ?2018/07340-5 & 2016/24531-3). Dr. Mauro Santamaria is supported by the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development from Brazil, CNPq (grant # 304269/2019-0). The authors report no conflicts of interest related to this study.

Funders	Funder number
S?o Paulo State
São Paulo State
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo	2016/07528‐9, 2016/24531-3, 2018/03353‐5, 2018/07340‐5 & 2016/24531‐3, 2016/16102‐5
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico	304269/2019‐0
Instituto Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia de Fluidos Complexos	2011.1.9358.1.6, 2014/50983‐3

Keywords

electric stimulation therapy
gingival recession
mucogingival surgery
wound healing

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Periodontics

Access to Document

10.1002/JPER.20-0122

Cite this

Miguel, M. M. V., Mathias-Santamaria, I. F., Rossato, A., Ferraz, L. F. F., Figueiredo-Neto, A. M., de Marco, A. C., Casarin, R. C. V., Wallet, S. M., Tatakis, D. N., Mathias, M. A., & Santamaria, M. P. (2021). Microcurrent electrotherapy improves palatal wound healing: Randomized clinical trial. Journal of Periodontology, 92(2), 244-253. https://doi.org/10.1002/JPER.20-0122

@article{db251a9cb3a2478c8bb40f1520d68bfa,

title = "Microcurrent electrotherapy improves palatal wound healing: Randomized clinical trial",

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 <0.05; 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.",

keywords = "electric stimulation therapy, gingival recession, mucogingival surgery, wound healing",

author = "Miguel, {Manuela Maria Viana} and Mathias-Santamaria, {Ingrid Fernandes} and Amanda Rossato and Ferraz, {La{\'i}s Fernanda Ferreira} and Figueiredo-Neto, {Ant{\^o}nio Martins} and {de Marco}, {Andrea Carvalho} and Casarin, {Renato Corr{\^e}a Viana} and Wallet, {Shannon Margaret} and Tatakis, {Dimitris N.} and Mathias, {Marcio Antonio} and Santamaria, {Mauro Pedrine}",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2020 American Academy of Periodontology",

year = "2021",

month = feb,

doi = "10.1002/JPER.20-0122",

language = "English",

volume = "92",

pages = "244--253",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Microcurrent electrotherapy improves palatal wound healing

T2 - Randomized clinical trial

AU - Miguel, Manuela Maria Viana

AU - Mathias-Santamaria, Ingrid Fernandes

AU - Rossato, Amanda

AU - Ferraz, Laís Fernanda Ferreira

AU - Figueiredo-Neto, Antônio Martins

AU - de Marco, Andrea Carvalho

AU - Casarin, Renato Corrêa Viana

AU - Wallet, Shannon Margaret

AU - Tatakis, Dimitris N.

AU - Mathias, Marcio Antonio

AU - Santamaria, Mauro Pedrine

PY - 2021/2

Y1 - 2021/2

N2 - 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 <0.05; 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.

AB - 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 <0.05; 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.

KW - electric stimulation therapy

KW - gingival recession

KW - mucogingival surgery

KW - wound healing

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85089988972&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85089988972&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/JPER.20-0122

DO - 10.1002/JPER.20-0122

M3 - Article

C2 - 32783220

AN - SCOPUS:85089988972

SN - 0022-3492

VL - 92

SP - 244

EP - 253

JO - Journal of Periodontology

JF - Journal of Periodontology

IS - 2

ER -

Microcurrent electrotherapy improves palatal wound healing: Randomized clinical trial

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Funding

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this