Skip to content

Clinical Efficacy of Frenectomies Using Diode Laser Versus Conventional Techniques

Patient Perceptions and Clinical Efficacy of Frenectomies Using Diode Laser Versus Conventional Techniques

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03156387
Enrollment
28
Registered
2017-05-17
Start date
2015-02-01
Completion date
2017-05-10
Last updated
2017-05-17

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

Conditions

High Frenum Attachment

Keywords

diode laser, scalpel surgery, frenectomy, postoperative complications

Brief summary

The aim of present study was to compare the keratinized gingival tissue measurements, degree of subjective complaints, and functional complications of using an 980 nm diode laser versus a scalpel for frenectomies. Thirty-six patients requiring frenectomies, between 18 and 51 years old, were randomly assigned to either scalpel or diode laser treatments. The soft tissue measurements, including the keratinized gingiva width (KGW), attached gingiva width(AGW), and attached gingiva thickness (AGT), were recorded before surgery, immediately after, one week later, and one, three, and six months after surgery. In addition, the functional complications and the morbidity (level of pain, swelling, and redness) were evaluated during the first postoperative week using a visual analog scale (VAS). The VAS scores indicated that the patients treated with a diode laser had less discomfort and functional complications compare with scalpel surgery.

Detailed description

The whole mouth records of each participant served as a basis for the clinical periodontal diagnoses. Prior to the frenectomy, the same investigator recorded the following parameters: plaque index (PLI), gingival index (GI), pocket probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), and bleeding on probing (BOP). All of the clinical parameters were measured at six sites per tooth (mesio, mid, and distobuccal, and mesio, mid, and distopalatal) using a Williams periodontal probe (Nordent Manufacturing Inc., Elk Grove Village, IL, USA) calibrated in millimeters. The patients were instructed to record the postoperative degrees of pain, redness, swelling, and functional complications, including chewing and speech, on a 10 cm horizontal visual analog scale (VAS), by placing a vertical mark between the two endpoints, from the first through seventh days. The scale was graded from left to right with values ranging from 0 (no pain, functional complications, discomfort, swelling, or redness) to 10 (worst pain, extreme functional complications, extreme discomfort, extreme swelling, and extreme redness). The keratinized gingiva width (KGW), attached gingiva width (AGW), and attached gingiva thickness (AGT) were also recorded before the surgery. Postoperative analyses were performed at four separate times: immediately, at the first week, and at the first and third months after surgery. The patients in each group were also asked if they required anesthesia during the operation and analgesics after the operation.

Interventions

PROCEDUREDiode laser

2.8 W diode laser surgery were applied on high frenulum attachment and follow-up VAS scores were evaluated

PROCEDUREScalpel

Scalpel surgery were performed after local anesthetic administration and VAS scores were recorded.

Sponsors

T.C. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Intervention model description

This study, designed as a randomized prospective controlled clinical trial, was conducted to compare the clinical outcomes of frenectomies performed using conventional surgery or a diode laser.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 51 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Those subjects with maxillary anterior frenula extending to the interdental papilla of the central incisors, those undergoing frenectomies for orthodontic, prosthodontic, or periodontal treatment and those with no surgical contraindications were included in this study.

Exclusion criteria

* The patients were excluded if they exhibited poor oral hygiene, received periodontal therapy, were being treated with antibiotics, anti-inflammatories, or analgesics during the previous three months, or if they had any systemic conditions that could affect oral surgery.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
postoperative degrees of painChange from postoperative first week at postoperative third monthvisual analog scale (0 to 10 cm)

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
plague indexpreoperativebetween 0 to 4 scale
functional complicationsChange from postoperative first week at postoperative third monthvisual analog scale (0 to 10 cm)

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026