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: 3028  Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 

Year : 2018  |  Volume : 9  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 613-618

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

1 Department of Periodontics, Karnavati School of Dentistry, Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India
2 Department of Conservative and Endodontics, Karnavati School of Dentistry, Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Surabhi Joshi
C/204, Sepal Exotica, Thaltej, Ahmedabad - 380 059, Gujarat
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/ccd.ccd_571_18

Rights and Permissions

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.

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
    PDF Downloaded168    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal