Skip to content

Conservative Surgery with Modified Widman Flap Vs Papilla Preservation Technique for the Treatment of Residual Pockets

Conservative Surgery with Modified Widman Flap Vs Conservative Surgery with Papilla Preservation Technique for the Treatment of Residual Pockets: a 5-year Randomized Clinical Trial

Status
Not yet recruiting
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT06661928
Acronym
MWF vs PPT
Enrollment
80
Registered
2024-10-28
Start date
2024-11-14
Completion date
2030-12-01
Last updated
2024-10-28

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

Conditions

Periodontitis

Brief summary

The primary aim of the study is to evaluate the efficacy of conservative surgery with or without papilla preservation technique in the treatment of deep residual pockets ≥ 6 mm in stage III-IV periodontitis patients after cause related therapy (step II) in terms of endpoints of therapy and other secondary outcomes at different time intervals (1, 3 and 5 years). Moreover, the study aims to evaluate the stability of the results obtained for the different surgical approaches over a 5 years follow-up period.

Interventions

Surgical access will be obtained using modified papilla preservation techniques and when interproximal space is narrow (less than 3mm in width) incision will be made using the simplified papilla preservation flap. Both flaps buccal and lingual/palatal will be elevated in any case to allow root surface cleaning and defects debridement under direct vision. Minimally invasive flap elevation preventing to damage inter proximal tissues with the preservation of the papilla. Defects debridement with mini-curettes. Root surface debridement with ultrasonic debridement with periotip and mini-curettes. Flaps will be positioned at the pre-surgical level without any tension. Monofilament non-resorbable 5-0 e-PTFE suturing material will be used. Suturing will be performed with external vertical mattress sutures to achieve primary intention closure.

Surgical access will be obtained using the modified Widman flap technique. Intrasulcular incision will be done on both buccal and lingual/palatal sides without attempting to preserve the interdental tissues and interdental tissues will be removed. Both flaps buccal and lingual/palatal will be elevated at full thickness in any case to allow root surface cleaning and defects debridement under direct vision, a vertical releasing incision could be made when needed. Defects debridement with mini-curettes. Root surface debridement with ultrasonic debridement with periotip and mini-curettes. Flaps will be positioned at the level of the alveolar crest without tension. Monofilament nonresorbable 5 - 0 e/PTFE suturing material will be used. Suturing will be performed with single interrupted sutures.

Sponsors

University of Turin, Italy
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Diagnosis of stage III/IV periodontitis. * Completed steps I-II periodontal therapy at least 6 weeks before. * Full mouth plaque score of less than 15% at re-evaluation. * Full mouth bleeding score of less than 15% at re-evaluation. * Sextant with residual probing pocket depth (PPD) ≥ 6 mm at ≥ 2 natural teeth (third molars excluded). * Signed informed consent.

Exclusion criteria

* Compromised general health which contraindicates the study procedures (ASA III-VI patients). * Systemic diseases/medications which could influence the outcome of the therapy (e.g. uncontrolled diabetes mellitus, non-plaque-induced gingival diseases, antiepileptic drugs (phenytoin and sodium valproate), certain calcium channel-blocking drugs (e.g., nifedipine, verapamil, diltiazem, amlodipine, felodipine), immunoregulating drugs (e.g., ciclosporine), and high-dose oral contraceptives). * Pregnant or nursing women. * Presence of tooth mobility ≥ class 2.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Pocket closure5 yearsDefined as Probing pocket depth of 3 mm or less or Probing pocket depth of 4 mm with the absence of Bleeding on Probing in sites with Probing pocket depth of 6 mm or more at baseline.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Tooth Retention5 yearsNumber of teeth in the treated sextant will be calculated.
Number of instrumentation re-intervention5 yearsNumber of instrumentation re-intervention during supportive periodontal therapy will be calculated
Mean Clinical Attachment Level changes5 yearsDefined as the mean changes in Clinical Attachment Level (distance in mm from the Cemento Enamel Junction to the bottom of the probable sulcus) at the involved sextant with respect to baseline.
Mean recession changes5 yearsDefined as the changes in recession (distance in mm from Cemento Enamel Junction to the gingival margin).
Mean Probing Pocket Depth changes5 yearsDefined as the mean changes in Probing pocket depth (distance in mm from the gingival margin to the bottom of the probable sulcus) at the involved sextant with respect to baseline.

Other

MeasureTime frameDescription
Discomfort during surgeryImmediately after surgery.Self reported on a 100-mm visual analog scale scale.

Contacts

Primary ContactMario Aimetti, Prof.
mario.aimetti@unito.it0116331543
Backup ContactGiacomo Baima
giacomo.baima@unito.it

Outcome results

None listed

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