Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of injectable platelet-rich fibrin (i-prf), titanium-prepared platelet-rich fibrin (t-prf), and 0.8% hyaluronic acid (HA) gel on clinical periodontal parameters, wound healing, patient comfort and satisfaction after gingivectomy and gingivoplasty procedures routinely performed in the treatment of chronic inflammatory gingival overgrowth. Materials and methods: In this clinical study, 60 systemically healthy patients with chronic inflammatory gingival overgrowth were randomly assigned to i-prf (n=15), t-prf (n=15), 0.8% HA (n=15), or control (n=15) groups and treated with gingivectomy and gingivoplasty after initial periodontal treatment. Pain and burning scores were evaluated with VAS 7 days after the procedures. Surgical areas were stained with Mira-2 tone and evaluated in ImageJ. Wound healing was evaluated using the Landry, Turnbull, and Howley (LTH) index and H2O2 foaming test at 7, 14, 21, and 28 days after the procedure. Clinical periodontal parameters assessed at baseline and 3 weeks after initial periodontal treatment were reassessed at 28 days following gingivectomy and gingivoplasty.
All patients diagnosed with chronic inflammatory gingival overgrowth based on clinical and radiological examinations underwent initial periodontal treatment (IPT) following baseline clinical periodontal assessments. Additionally, they received comprehensive oral hygiene instructions. After three weeks, patients were recalled for follow-up, and clinical periodontal parameters were re-evaluated. Gingivectomy and gingivoplasty surgery were planned. Gingival growth was graded according to the following indices: The buccolingual aspect of gingival growth was classified according to the MB index (defined by Seymour and later modified by Miranda et al.) and the vertical aspect was classified according to the GOI index (defined by Angelopoulos and Goaz and later modified by Miller et al.). Patients presenting with a score greater than 0 in both indices were included in the study. A total of four groups were planned in the study: one control group and three test groups. * Test Group 1: Following gingivectomy with the conventional method (#15 scalpel), I-PRF is applied to the wound site and covered with periodontal dressing. * Test Group 2: Following gingivectomy with the conventional method, T-PRF is applied to the wound site and covered with periodontal dressing. * Test Group 3: Following gingivectomy with the conventional method, 0.8% HA (Gengigel; Ricerfarma, Milan, Italy) is applied to the wound site and covered with periodontal dressing. * Control Group: Following gingivectomy with the conventional method, the wound site is covered only with periodontal dressing, without additional biomaterials. Clinical periodontal parameters were evaluated at baseline (T0), after IPT (T1), and in the 1st month after gingivectomy and gingivoplasty (T2). The gingival index (GI; Loe and Silness GI), plaque index (PI; Turesky-Gilmore-Glickman modification of the Quigley-Hein PI), bleeding on probing index (BOP), and probing depth (PD) were recorded. Using a Williams periodontal probe, the GI, BOP, and PD were assessed at six sites per tooth (excluding the third molar): three sites on the buccal surface (disto-buccal/labial, mesio-buccal/labial, and mid-buccal/labial) and three sites on the lingual surface (disto-lingual/palatal, mesio-lingual/palatal, and mid-lingual/palatal). Conventional gingivectomy and gingivoplasty procedures were performed under local infiltration anesthesia. A 45-degree inclined external bevel incision was made using a surgical scalpel (Carbon, No. 15) and a gingivectomy blade (Hu-Friedy 15/16, Chicago, USA), starting from the distal end of the incision line. The interdental area was shaped using an Orban knife (Hu-Friedy 1/2, Chicago, USA), and any remaining granulation tissue was carefully removed from the surrounding area with curettes and scissors (Hu-Friedy, Chicago, USA). Finally, gingivoplasty was completed using a Kirkland knife (Hu-Friedy, Chicago, USA). After the surgical procedures were completed, the control group areas were left to heal spontaneously. The other groups were treated with i-prf, t-prf, or 0.8% HA. Surgical areas in the control and test sites were covered with periodontal dressing (Coepak, Isip, IL, USA). Patients were advised to avoid hot foods, to consume soft foods, and to keep the dressing in the mouth until the next examination. Patients were prescribed mouthwash containing 0.12% chlorhexidine and analgesic containing paracetamol to be used twice a day for one week.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE
Enrollment
60
Blood samples were collected in two 10 ml plastic tubes without anticoagulant. The tubes were centrifuged for 3 min at 2500 rpm in a centrifuge device and i-prf was obtained.
The blood was drawn into a 20 ml syringe and immediately divided into two sterile grade IV titanium tubes containing 10 ml of blood. The tubes were placed opposite each other and centrifuged at 2700 rpm for 12 minutes at room temperature and t-prf was obtained.
0.8% hyaluronic acid (HA) gel (Gengigel) was applied to the wound sites.
Nothing has applied.
Sağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi Gülhane Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi
Ankara, Ankara, Turkey (Türkiye)
Evaluation of wound epithelialization
Evaluation of wound epithelialization with Mira-2 tone Solution
Time frame: after gingivectomy (Day 0), Day 7, Day 14, Day 21, Day 28
LTH wound healing index
Assessment of soft tissue healing with Landry, Turnbull, and Howley (LTH) index
Time frame: Day 7, Day 14, Day 21, Day 28
H2O2 foaming test
H2O2 foaming test (evaluation of wound epithelialization)
Time frame: Day 7, Day 14, Day 21, Day 28
Pain and burning scores
Pain and burning scores were evaluated with VAS.
Time frame: After gingivectomy Day 0, Day 1, Day 2, Day 3, Day 4, Day 5, Day 6, Day 7
Gingival index (GI)
Improvement in GI; lower scores mean a better outcome; Minimum score:0 Max.score: 3
Time frame: Baseline, 3 weeks, Day 28 after gingivectomy
Plaque index (PI)
Improvement in PI; lower scores mean a better outcome; Minimum score:0 Max.score: 5
Time frame: Baseline, 3 weeks, Day 28 after gingivectomy
Bleeding on Probing (BOP)
Improvement in PBI; lower scores mean a better outcome; Minimum score: %0 Max.score: %100
Time frame: Baseline, 3 weeks, Day 28 after gingivectomy
Pocket depth (PD)
Improvement in PD; lower scores mean a better outcome
Time frame: Baseline, 3 weeks, Day 28 after gingivectomy
OHIP-14
Improvement in Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) ; lower scores mean a better outcome
Time frame: Baseline, Day 7, Day 14 after gingivectomy
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.