Ne plu estas ŝvelaĵo en la gingivo post la kuracado.

Ne plu means no longer, not anymore, or not any longer.

So Ne plu estas ŝvelaĵo... means There is no longer any swelling...

This is a very common Esperanto combination:

• plu = further, more, any longer
• ne plu = no longer

This is an existential sentence, like English there is or there are.

Esperanto usually does not need a separate word matching English there in this kind of sentence. So:

• Estas ŝvelaĵo = There is swelling
• Ne plu estas ŝvelaĵo = There is no longer swelling

So even though the sentence literally looks like No longer is swelling..., the natural meaning is There is no longer any swelling...

Ŝvelaĵo means a swelling, a swollen area, or swelling in the sense of a physical swollen spot.

It comes from the root ŝvel-, which is about swelling:

• ŝveli = to swell
• ŝvela = swollen
• ŝvelaĵo = a swelling / swollen thing

So this noun refers to the actual swollen area, not just the general idea of swelling.

The suffix -aĵ- often makes a word mean a concrete thing characterized by the root idea.

Here:

• ŝvela = swollen
• ŝvelaĵo = a swollen thing / a swelling

This is a useful pattern in Esperanto. It often turns a quality or description into a concrete thing or manifestation of that quality.

Because ŝvelaĵo is indefinite here.

The sentence is not talking about the specific swelling as an already identified object. It is simply stating that swelling is no longer present. In Esperanto, that often means no article is used.

Compare:

• Estas problemo. = There is a problem.
• Ne plu estas ŝvelaĵo. = There is no longer any swelling.

Using no article here is very natural.

En means in.

So en la gingivo means in the gum or in the gum tissue. It gives the location of the swelling.

There is no motion here, only location, so en is the normal choice.

Esperanto does not always match English number exactly.

La gingivo can refer to:

• one gum area
• the gum tissue in general
• the relevant gum being discussed

So the singular is normal here. If you really wanted to emphasize multiple gums, you could say la gingivoj, but the singular works well in this medical context.

Because both are understood as specific from the context.

• la gingivo = the gum/gum area being discussed
• la kuracado = the treatment already known in the situation

In medical or situational context, this is very natural. The speaker and listener both know which gum and which treatment are meant.

Because there is no direct object in this sentence.

• ŝvelaĵo goes with estas in an existential sentence
• en la gingivo is a prepositional phrase
• post la kuracado is also a prepositional phrase

So no accusative -n is needed.

You would see -n in a different structure, for example:

• La kuracado forigis la ŝvelaĵon. = The treatment removed the swelling.

Here ŝvelaĵon is the direct object, so it gets -n.

It means after the treatment.

• post = after
• la kuracado = the treatment

So this phrase tells us when the swelling was no longer present.

Yes. Esperanto word order is fairly flexible.

For example, you could also say:

• Post la kuracado ne plu estas ŝvelaĵo en la gingivo.
• En la gingivo ne plu estas ŝvelaĵo post la kuracado.

The original sentence is natural and clear. It starts with the main statement, Ne plu estas ŝvelaĵo, and then adds the place and time.

Yes, that is also natural.

There is a slight difference in focus:

• Ne plu estas ŝvelaĵo en la gingivo focuses on the presence or absence of a swelling.
• La gingivo ne plu estas ŝvela focuses on the condition of the gum itself: The gum is no longer swollen.

Both are good Esperanto, but the original sounds a little more clinical or objective.