Evaluation of color and width of keratinized gingiva gain in free gingival graft and connective tissue graft

Evaluation of color and width of keratinized gingiva gain in two surgical techniques of gingival augmentation: Free gingival graft and Connective tissue graft covered by thin mocusal flap

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Interventional

Source

IRCT

Registry ID

IRCT20171031037120N2

Enrollment

Registered

2018-05-17

Start date

2018-02-03

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2018-06-18

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Comparing two surgical techniques for gingival augmentation.

Interventions

Intervention 1: Control group : treated with FGG.The apicocoronal size of the graft prepared for each area was measured. Intervention 2: Intervention group is treated by connective tissue graft covere

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 15 healthy nonsmoker adults with good oral hygiene who had not used antibiotics within the six preceding months For the split mouth surgery, the two recipient areas on the two sides as well as the surrounding area of each tooth (incisor, canine, or premolar), the two adjacent distal and mesial teeth had to be free of gingivitis and periodontitis (<15% plaque index and gingival index), bone resorption, and <3mm pocket depth. There was <2mm keratinized gingiva on the buccal or labial side of the tooth, and adequate vestibule depth on the desired site. One side was to be treated with CTG as the test group and the other side to be treated with FGG as the control group.The donor site was the hard palate with available palate arch and at least 5 mm soft tissue on the bone.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: exclusion criteria were smoking, pregnancy, systemic diseases, use of antibiotics within the six preceding months, and lack of postoperative cooperation in maintaining oral hygiene or attending the follow-up sessions

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Evaluation of color adaptation and width of keratizied gingiva gain in 2 surgical techniques. Timepoint: Evaluation of width of gingiva befor surgery and 6 month after intervation, evaluation of color 6 month after surgery. Method of measurement: The color of the grafted areas was determined and compared by using both professional evaluation and digital evaluation. The professional evaluation was done by two blind examiners through Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The CIE (LAB) and LUT (RGB) color indices were used to compare the color of the two areas and the background color. This system allows the calculation of ?E (Euclidean Distance) which is a criterion to compare the color between two areas, and also color matching between two areas (test or control) and the adjacent gingiva.	—

Measure

Time frame

Evaluation of color adaptation and width of keratizied gingiva gain in 2 surgical techniques. Timepoint: Evaluation of width of gingiva befor surgery and 6 month after intervation, evaluation of color 6 month after surgery. Method of measurement: The color of the grafted areas was determined and compared by using both professional evaluation and digital evaluation. The professional evaluation was done by two blind examiners through Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The CIE (LAB) and LUT (RGB) color indices were used to compare the color of the two areas and the background color. This system allows the calculation of ?E (Euclidean Distance) which is a criterion to compare the color between two areas, and also color matching between two areas (test or control) and the adjacent gingiva.

—

Countries

Iran (Islamic Republic of)

Contacts

Public ContactSeyede Mohadese Asadinejad

Shiraz University of Medical Sciences

m_asadi@sums.ac.ir+98 71 3628 5279

Outcome results

None listed

Source: IRCT (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026