Skip to content

Comparison of Free Gingival Graft and Modified Apical Repositioning Flap Techniques

Comparison of Free Gingival Graft and Modified Apical Repositioning Flap Techniques to Create Attached Gingiva: A Long-Term (2 Year) Retrospective Study

Status
Terminated
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT06253910
Enrollment
15
Registered
2024-02-12
Start date
2019-02-15
Completion date
2023-12-01
Last updated
2024-02-13

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

Conditions

Periodontal Diseases

Keywords

attached gingiva, free gingival graft

Brief summary

Attached gingiva, a crucial component of the keratinized tissue, plays a vital role in preserving periodontal health. The free gingival graft (FGG) and modified apically repositioned flap (MARF) techniques are frequently used for addressing issues related to insufficient attached gingiva. The aim of this study was to compare the efficiency of the FGG and the MARF increasing the zone of attached gingiva in 2-year posttreatment.

Detailed description

The study included 15 participants who were both systemically and periodontally healthy, and these participants had a total of 21 teeth (10 for SDG and 11 for MARF). All included teeth had an attached gingiva width ranging from 0.5 mm to 1.5 mm and showed no signs of bone dehiscence. SDG and MARF methods were selected randomly (coin-to-coin). Clinical parameters recorded at baseline, third month, at first and second years were plaque index (PI), pocket probing depth (PPD), keratinized tissue width (KTW), attached gingiva width (AGW), bleeding on probing (BOP), gingival recession (GR) and clinical attachment level (CAL).

Interventions

Patient selection were selected according to selected criteria.

Following the operations, periodontal measurements were measured at the baseline, third month, first and second years.

Sponsors

Istanbul Medipol University Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Investigator)

Masking description

double (Participant, Investigator)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
34 Years to 58 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* having ≥15 permanent teeth excluding third molars, * not using any orthodontic appliance, * not being pregnant or breastfeeding, * not having any uncontrolled chronic and/or auto-immune disease, * not smoking.

Exclusion criteria

* having chronic and/or auto-immune disease * smoking.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Attached gingiva widthBaseline, third month, first year and second years.The width of the attached gingiva was calculated by measuring the distance from the crest of the gingival margin to the mucogingival junction and then subtracting the probing depth of the gingival sulcus from this distance on the particular tooth.
Keratinized tissue widthBaseline, third month, first year and second years.The width of the keratinized tissue was calculated by measuring the distance from the crest of the gingival margin to the mucogingival junction

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Pocket probing depthBaseline, third month, first year and second years.Measurement of the depth of a sulcus or periodontal pocket determined by measuring distance from a gingival margin to the base of the sulcus or pocket with a calibrated periodontal probe.

Countries

Turkey (Türkiye)

Outcome results

None listed

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