Soft Tissue Wound Healing Following Different Gingivectomy Techniques
Condition: Gingival Overgrowth
MeSH terms: Gingival Overgrowth
Study type: Interventional

Summary: 
      The aim of this study was to evaluate the degree of clinical discomfort and the issues
      experienced by patients and to use a software image program to compare wound healing during
      the 2-week period following gingivectomy performed with different techniques.
    

Detailed description: 
      Horizontal and vertical gingival overgrowth indexes were evaluated before and after surgery
      during each follow-up controls. The vertical distance of gingival tissue was measured from
      the gingival margin to the cement-enamel junction (gingival overgrowth [GO] index).
      Horizontal gingival values were also recorded between the tooth surfaces and the papillary
      tissue surface at the interdental contact point as buccolingual aspect (mesiobuccal [MB]
      index).

      Postoperative Evaluations

      The postoperative parameters, including pain, burning, edema, vascularization, erythema,
      epithelization, bleeding and carbonization, were recorded at 1, 3, 5, 7, and 14 days
      postoperatively.

      Postoperative pain, burning, erythema, vascularization, and edema were assessed via the
      visual analogue scale (VAS). The VAS is a 100-mm horizontal-line scale that is used to
      quantify subjective symptoms such as pain, burning, erythema, vascularization, and edema. In
      the present study, researchers used a standard VAS on which patients drew a vertical sign
      along a 10-cm scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (highest degree of pain). Bleeding and
      carbonization during the postoperative period were assessed as either present or absent.
      Patients evaluated their postoperative pain, burning, and bleeding values. The same
      researcher evaluated erythema, vascularization, edema, and epithelization values.

      Evaluation of Surgical Wound Area After gingivectomy operation, the surgical site was
      evaluated with hydrogen peroxide to detect the presence of epithelization. A blinded
      researcher who used a standard digital camera to take standard magnification photographs
      assessed the operation area, consisting of the epithelium. The researcher examined all
      photographs with the assistance of an image-analyzing software program. The mesio-distal
      width of the maxillary right central tooth was recorded for each patient, and photographs
      were calibrated via the reference values. In the areas subjected to hydrogen peroxide
      application and experiencing tissue reaction, there was a lack of an epithelial layer in the
      wound area. The wound surface areas of foamy fields on the all of the groups' photographs
      were recorded on days 1, 3, 5, 7, and 14 following the gingivectomies.
    

Intervention name(s): Ceramic rotary bur; Diode laser; Scalpel
Intervention type(s): Device; Device; Device
Intervention description(s): Gingivoplasties were performed with the same ceramic burs to easily provide a knife-edge appearance with ceramic rotary bur; The fiber optic laser tip had a 320-μm diameter with a 2.8 W output power were used in the study.; Scalpel surgery were performed as control group (conventioanl group).
Other intervention name(s): Meisenger ceramic rotary bur; SiroLase Advance &Xtend
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention model: Parallel Assignment
Intervention model description: The trial is parallel-designed, controlled, prospective clinical study.
Masking: None (Open Label)
Primary purpose: Treatment
Keywords: rotary; diode laser; gingivectomy; wound healing