## 1 Introduction  
Periodontal and peri-implant surgery techniques that aim to increase the amount of tissue around the teeth or implants are becoming increasingly frequent in the dental [1; 2; 3; 4].  
Maintaining an adequate thickness of the attached gingiva around the teeth and implants is of crucial importance both for the maintenance of periodontal health and for the stability of the peri-implant tissues, as well as having fundamental importance in the aesthetic field [5; 6; 7; 8].  
In the literature, many periodontal surgery techniques and different materials have been described that aim to increase the amount of attached gingiva and different techniques and materials in peri-implant surgery to increase the amount of keratinized tissue around implants [9; 10].  
One of the most used, most predictable, and most described techniques in the literature is surgery which involves the use of a free soft tissue graft taken from the palate with the overlying epithelium gingival graft (FGG) or only the connective tissue graft (CTG).  
The use of free gingival graft (FGG) and connective tissue graft (CTG) are among the most predictable periodontal and peri-implant plastic surgery procedures, and the gold standard regarding the tissue to be grafted is the epithelium and/or the connective tissue taken from the palatal area [11; 12].  
However, palatal harvesting causes severe discomfort in the palatal area in patients undergoing harvesting [13].  
After FGG and CTG, patients have a small percentage of postoperative complications, such as dentin hypersensitivity, bleeding, edema, pain, and delayed wound healing [14; 15].  
Postoperative pain is a negative patient experience that causes difficulty in swallowing and negatively influences patient compliance and confidence in treatment [16].  
It is essential to seek the implementation of alternatives to stimulate the healing of the donor site surgical wound, allowing for the reduction in discomfort and postoperative drug consumption. In this context, numerous strategies have been developed to promote lower patient morbidity, and several materials have been proposed and described in the literature to try to accelerate the healing processes of palatal wounds after FGG or CTG harvesting [17; 18].  
Among the proposed materials, we find periodontal tablets [19], hemostatic agents, extracts of medicinal plants [20], and also bioadhesive materials, such as hyaluronic acid [14; 21; 22].  
Alternatively, for postoperative control after palatal harvesting operations, we find the use of sutures, biostimulatory procedures such as the application of photobiomodulation [24], physical barriers such as resin or acetate stents [25], collagen sponges, platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) [26; 27; 28; 29], and cyanoacrylate adhesives [30; 31; 32], as well as topical substances such as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory stent sprays [33], simvastatin [34], erythropoietin, or ozone products [35; 36; 37].  
The data in the literature are very varied and often unclear and conflicting; therefore, this review of reviews aims to identify which products or techniques are the best for patients and which can result in fewer side effects and less morbidity in patients compared to the main outcomes, such as postoperative pain and wound healing.