Microsurgical vs Macro Surgical Approach for Grade II Gingival Recessions Employing Laterally Repositioned Flap

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
This study was conducted to assess the evaluation of micro and Macro surgical approach in the treatment of grade II gingival recessions using the laterally repositioned flap

Detailed Description
-----------------
In this study total, 30 patients were selected The patients initially received a comprehensive periodontal examination and complete plaque control program including oral hygiene to eliminate habits related to the aetiology of recession. Scaling, root planning and occlusal adjustments were done The patients were randomly assigned and divided into two groups. Group A and Group B. Patients with miller class II were treated with a laterally repositioned flap to obtain root coverage using conventional macrosurgical approach (15patients) and microsurgical approach(15patients) The clinical parameters evaluated were height of gingival recession relative clinical attachment level which was measured as the distance from a fixed point in a stent to the bottom of the pocket and gingival biotype at baseline, 3 months and 6 months period

Official Title
-----------------
Comparison of Conventional vs Microsurgical Method for Root Coverage by Lateral Displacement Flap

Conditions
-----------------
Gingival Recession, Localized

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Procedure: root coverage


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Age 20-50 yrs ClassII gingival recession Vital teeth that were free from caries or inadequate restorations Sufficient width of attached gingiva Exclusion Criteria: Any systemic diseases and smokers ClassI,III&IV gingival recession Abnormal frenal attachments Interdental bone loss with tooth mobility

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 20 Years
Maximum Age: 50 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Treatment
Intervention Model: Single Group Assignment
Interventional Model Description: The patients will be equally divided into two test groups. Group A and Group B after phase I therapy. the group A patients will be treated with laterally repositioned flap to obtain root coverage using microsurgical approach. The group B patients will be treated with laterally repositioned flap to obtain root coverage using macrosurgical approach
Masking: None (Open Label)


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Experimental: experimental group<br>Group A-15 patients were allocated to the microsurgical group for root coverage. following scaling and root planning, the laterally repositioned flap was done using the microsurgical approach Group B-15 Patients were allocated to the conventional group for root coverage following scaling and root planning, the laterally repositioned flap was done using the macrosurgical approach | Procedure: root coverage<br>* Group A: After administration of local anaesthesia using ophthalmic microsurgical knives a V-shaped incision was made in the gingival recession area. the gingiva was removed .the adjacent partial thickness pedicle flap was reflected from the donor area .the pedicle flap was then covered over the recipient site. then secured with 6-0 absorbable sling suture without tension. the surgical procedure was done with seilar microscope 40X magnification. Group B: After administration of local anaesthesia using 15 no blade a V-shaped incision was made in the gingival recession area . gingiva was removed .the adjacent partial thickness pedicle flap was reflected from the donor area .the pedicle flap was then covered over the recipient site. then carefully secured with 4-0 absorbable sling suture<br>|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| vertical depth of recession | The height of gingival recession: From cementoenamel junction to the free gingival margin. | Change in level of gingival margin from baseline to 6 months. | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| horizontal width of recession | The width of gingival recession: Horizontal dimension of gingival defect at the level of Cementoenamel junction.. | Change in horizontal dimension of gingival margin from baseline to 6 months. |