Horizontal continuous and apical stretching sutures does not reduce FGG shrinkage: A split-mouth randomized controlled clinical trial

Abstract

Purpose This study aimed to evaluate whether horizontal continuous and apical stretching sutures could reduce FGG shrinkage. Materials and Methods In this randomized controlled clinical trial ten patients (20 sites, seven females and three males) ranging from 18 to 53 years (average 39 years) with insufficient keratinized and attached gingiva received FGG in two quadrants of mandible (splitmouth design). Horizontal continuous and apical stretching sutures were used in test sites in addition to common suturing techniques. Clinical parameters including probing depth (PD), the width of keratinized and attached gingiva (KG, AG), the horizontal and vertical dimension of the graft (HD, VD), and graft area (GA) were recorded at baseline and 1, 3, and six months after the operation. Results PD did not differ significantly for six months. The average change of other parameters in test and control sites respectively was as follows: KG increased 5.5 mm and 5.1 mm, AG increased 5.3 mm and 5.1 mm, HD shrinkage was 21.6% and 15.8%, VD shrinkage was 33.7% and 33.2%, GA shrinkage was 47.3% and 43.3%. There were no significant differences between test and control sites in clinical parameters six months after surgery. Conclusion Application of horizontal continuous and apical stretching sutures does not reduce FGG shrinkage.

Keywords

• Free gingival graft
• graft shrinkage
• continuous horizontal suture
• apical stretching suture
• probing depth

References

1. 1. Rancitelli D, Poli PP, Cicciu M, Lini F, Roncucci R, Cervino G, et al. Soft-Tissue Enhancement Combined With Biologically Oriented Preparation Technique to Correct Volumetric Bone Defects: A Clinical Case Report. J Oral Implantol 2017;43(4):307-13. [CrossRef]
2. 2. Cifcibasi E, Karabey V, Koyuncuoglu C, Duzagac E, Genceli E, Kasali K, et al. Clinical evaluation of free gingival graft shrinkage in horizontal and vertical dimensions. J Istanb Univ Fac Dent 2015;49(3):11-6. [CrossRef]
3. 3. Menceva Z, Dimitrovski O, Popovska M, Spasovski S, Spirov V, Petrushevska G. Free Gingival Graft versus Mucograft: Histological Evaluation. Open Access Maced J Med Sci 2018;6(4):675-9. [CrossRef]
4. 4. Agarwal C, Kumar AT, Mehta DS. Comparative evaluation of free gingival graft and AlloDerm® in enhancing the width of attached gingival: A clinical study. Contemporary clinical dentistry 2015;6(4):483. [CrossRef]
5. 5. Yuce HB. Official Publication of Cumhuriyet University Faculty of Dentistry. Cumhuriyet Dental Journal 2013;18(2):148-55.
6. 6. Donoff RB. Biological basis for vestibuloplasty procedures. J Oral Surg 1976;34(10):890-6.
7. 7. Harris RJ. Clinical evaluation of 3 techniques to augment keratinized tissue without root coverage. J Periodontol 2001;72(7):932-8. [CrossRef]
8. 8. Hatipoglu H, Keceli HG, Guncu GN, Sengun D, Tozum TF. Vertical and horizontal dimensional evaluation of free gingival grafts in the anterior mandible: a case report series. Clin Oral Investig 2007;11(2):107-13. [CrossRef]

9. 9. Kim Y-J, Lim S-B, Chung C-H. The clinical study on shrinkage rate of graft following connective tissue autografts. The Journal of the Korean Academy of Periodontology 2000;30(3):639-49. [CrossRef]
10. 10. Holbrook T, Ochsenbein C. Complete coverage of the denuded root surface with a one-stage gingival graft. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1983;3(3):8-27.
11. 11. Miller PD, Jr. Regenerative and reconstructive periodontal plastic surgery. Mucogingival surgery. Dent Clin North Am 1988;32(2):287-306.
12. 12. Dorfman HS, Kennedy JE, Bird WC. Longitudinal evaluation of free autogenous gingival grafts. J Clin Periodontol 1980;7(4):31624. [CrossRef]
13. 13. Dorfman HS, Kennedy JE, Bird WC. Longitudinal evaluation of free autogenous gingival grafts. A four year report. J Periodontol 1982;53(6):349-52. [CrossRef]
14. 14. Wei PC, Laurell L, Lingen MW, Geivelis M. Acellular dermal matrix allografts to achieve increased attached gingiva. Part 2. A histological comparative study. J Periodontol 2002;73(3):25765. [CrossRef]
15. 15. Agudio G, Nieri M, Rotundo R, Cortellini P, Pini Prato G. Free gingival grafts to increase keratinized tissue: a retrospective long-term evaluation (10 to 25 years) of outcomes. J Periodontol 2008;79(4):587-94. [CrossRef]
16. 16. Kovacevic K. [Long-term therapeutic results following the application of free mucogingival autografts]. Stomatol Glas Srb 1991;37(5):491-501.
17. 17. Egli U, Vollmer WH, Rateitschak KH. Follow-up studies of free gingival grafts. J Clin Periodontol 1975;2(2):98-104. [CrossRef]
18. 18. Rateitschak KH, Egli U, Fringeli G. Recession: a 4-year longitudinal study after free gingival grafts. J Clin Periodontol 1979;6(3):15864. [CrossRef]
19. 19. Silva CO, Ribeiro Edel P, Sallum AW, Tatakis DN. Free gingival grafts: graft shrinkage and donor-site healing in smokers and non-smokers. J Periodontol 2010;81(5):692-701. [CrossRef]
20. 20. Jung HS, Lim SB, Chung CH. The Clinical Study on Shrinkage Rate of Graft following Strip Gingival Autografts. The Journal of the Korean Academy of Periodontology. 1997;27(3):549-59. [CrossRef]