Comparative evaluation of treatment of localized gingival recessions with coronally advanced flap using microsurgical and conventional techniques

Background: Coverage of gingival recession is a very precision-oriented procedure. Employment of operating microscope has proved to be a boon in various surgical procedures and therefore can have positive benefits on the outcome of a procedure. Aim: The aim of this study is to find out whether the u...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Chandni Patel (Author), Rupal Mehta (Author), Surabhi Joshi (Author), Tanvi Hirani (Author), Chintan Joshi (Author)
Format: Book
Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2018-01-01T00:00:00Z.
Subjects:
Online Access:Connect to this object online.
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background: Coverage of gingival recession is a very precision-oriented procedure. Employment of operating microscope has proved to be a boon in various surgical procedures and therefore can have positive benefits on the outcome of a procedure. Aim: The aim of this study is to find out whether the use of an operating microscope in the surgical treatment of Millers Class I and Class II gingival recession defects could improve the outcome in terms of root coverage and final tissue appearance compared to those done by the conventional technique. Materials and Methods: This clinical study was carried out on ten patients with the presence of bilateral isolated gingival recession classified as Miller's Class I or Class II recession defect. The split-mouth design was used where coronally advanced flap with the placement of platelet-rich fibrin was done in defects in test (microsurgical) and control (conventional) groups. Various clinical parameters were recorded at baseline and then postoperatively at 3-months and 6-month intervals. Results: The visual analog scale scores showed a statistically significant difference between scores while all other parameters had no statistically significant difference in intergroup comparison after 3 and 6 months. Conclusion: While microscope permitted less traumatic and minimally invasive procedure, both groups showed convincing improvement in clinical parameters.
Item Description:0976-237X
0976-2361
10.4103/ccd.ccd_571_18