Comparison Between Free Gingival Graft and Palatal Pedicle Flap

NACompletedINTERVENTIONAL
Enrollment

30

Participants

Timeline

Start Date

June 27, 2021

Primary Completion Date

June 23, 2022

Study Completion Date

March 7, 2023

Conditions
Peri-Implant HealthPeri-Implant TissuesPeri-implant Bone Level
Interventions
PROCEDURE

APF + FGG

In APF + FGG technique, a split- thickness flap was prepared and apically positioned using 5-0 (PDS\*II, Polydioxanone, ETHICON) or 6-0 (PROLENE, ETHICON) sutures for flap stabilization. To eliminate muscle and frenum attachment at recipient site, vestibuloplasty and a periosteal incision were performed. A 4 mm or 6 mm healing abutment was then screwed onto the implants. FGG was harvested from palate in a 7-8 mm width and trimmed to an even thickness of 1 to 1.5 mm. A resorbable hemostatic sponge (Spongostan, Ethicon, Johnson \& Johnson) was placed at donor site for wound coverage. For graft fixation, a loop suture with 6-0 (PROLENE, ETHICON) was first placed at the center of recipient site, additional sutures were added to enhance stabilization.

PROCEDURE

PPF group

For the PPF group, the palatal sliding flap was a modified version of modified roll technique, as described in previous cohort study. Unlike the original technique, the crestal incision was placed 5 mm palatally from the border of keratinized tissue to allow for KMW redistribution, and a partially split-thickness flap was harvested from palatal connective tissue graft (CTG). Following buccal pouch flap preparation, a slight APF was required in cases with limited vestibular depth. When the palatal pedicle CTG was rolled in buccal pouch flap, a loop suture with 6-0 (PROLENE, ETHICON) was used for flap stabilization.

Trial Locations (1)

105

Taipei Chang Gung Memorial hospital, Taipei

All Listed Sponsors
lead

Chang Gung Memorial Hospital

OTHER