Contemporary Clinical Dentistry
   
  Home | About us | Editorial board | Search
Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Advertise
Instructions | Online submission| Contact us | Subscribe |

 

Login  | Users Online: 1615  Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 

ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2014  |  Volume : 5  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 366-370

Comparative evaluation of the relative efficacy of the free mucosal graft and periosteal fenestration for increasing the vestibular depth - A clinical study


Department of Periodontology, Subharti Dental College, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh, India

Correspondence Address:
Braham Prakash Khattak
Subharti Dental College, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0976-237X.137951

Rights and Permissions

Purpose: The aim of the present study was to compare the periosteal fenestration (PF) and free mucosal graft (FMG) techniques in mandibular anterior region to increase the vestibular depth. Methodology: A total of 20 systemically healthy cases (10 patients in each group) with shallow vestibular depth and reduced width of attached gingiva in lower anterior region were included in the present study. Clinical parameters recorded included Gingival index (GI), Plaque index (PI), Oral hygiene index simplified (OHI S), Vestibular depth (VD), width of attached gingiva and post operative discomfort. Findings: The results at the end of 3 months showed that the mean GI, PI, OHI S decreased significantly and remained low throughout the study period. The mean gain in percentage of vestibular depth at the end of 3 months for group 1(PF) was 48.4% with relapse of 7.2% from the baseline. For group 2 (FMG), the mean gain in percentage of vestibular depth at the end of 3 months for was 50% with relapse of 6.2% from the baseline. The mean gain in percentage of attached gingiva at 3 months for group 1 and 2 was 65.9% and 74%, respectively. In comparison of group 1 and 2, group 2 showed better results in terms of increasing the vestibular depth and attached gingiva than group 1 although the intergroup comparison was not statistically significant. Conclusion: When aim of the clinician is to treat a patient with shallow vestibule together with reduced width of attached gingiva, the use of periosteal fenestration yields similar results to that of FMG.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed3477    
    Printed31    
    Emailed1    
    PDF Downloaded240    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal