Limits...
Clinical evaluation of the marginal gingiva as a donor tissue to augment the width of keratinized gingiva: Series of 2 cases with 3-year follow-up.

Khanuja PK, Sharma RK, Tewari S, Narula SC - Contemp Clin Dent (2015)

Bottom Line: To the best of our knowledge, no such cases have been documented in the literature.This not only improved plaque control but also resulted in acceptable esthetic results over 3 years.It may be concluded that buccal marginal gingiva may provide a predictable substitute to other donor tissues to augment gingiva.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Periodontics and Oral Implantology, Post Graduate Institute of Dental Sciences, Rohtak, Haryana, India.

ABSTRACT
The indications to increase the width of keratinized gingiva have not been proven beyond doubt; however it becomes indispensable in certain clinical situations. Inspite of frequently encountered complications, palate is considered most preferred area to harvest the free gingival graft (FGG). This procedure aimed at investigating the potential of buccal marginal gingiva as a donor to augment keratinized gingiva. To the best of our knowledge, no such cases have been documented in the literature. FGG harvested from maxillary buccal marginal gingiva was used to augment gingiva in the mandibular anterior region for two patients. This not only improved plaque control but also resulted in acceptable esthetic results over 3 years. Furthermore, gingiva at donor sites gained its normal form and was in harmony with the neighboring teeth. It may be concluded that buccal marginal gingiva may provide a predictable substitute to other donor tissues to augment gingiva.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

(a) Healing at donor site at 36 months: Note the normal form and harmony of gingiva with the adjacent teeth (case 1). (b) Maxillary first molar on the contralateral site: Note the comparable contour of the gingival margin (case 1)
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4374310&req=5

Figure 3: (a) Healing at donor site at 36 months: Note the normal form and harmony of gingiva with the adjacent teeth (case 1). (b) Maxillary first molar on the contralateral site: Note the comparable contour of the gingival margin (case 1)

Mentions: At 3 months postoperatively when keratinization is expected to be complete, graft blended well with the adjacent tissues and was not clearly distinguishable [Figure 2a and b]. Increased gingival width following surgical procedure [Table 1, Figure 2c and d] improved oral hygiene and decreased gingival inflammation [Tables 2 and 3]. Gingiva at donor sites regained its normal form and contour at 3 months [Figure 3a and b]. Evaluation of esthetics demonstrated acceptable esthetic results wherein 80% and 60% examiners rated results as excellent for case 1 and case 2, respectively, while rest rated it as very good [Table 4].


Clinical evaluation of the marginal gingiva as a donor tissue to augment the width of keratinized gingiva: Series of 2 cases with 3-year follow-up.

Khanuja PK, Sharma RK, Tewari S, Narula SC - Contemp Clin Dent (2015)

(a) Healing at donor site at 36 months: Note the normal form and harmony of gingiva with the adjacent teeth (case 1). (b) Maxillary first molar on the contralateral site: Note the comparable contour of the gingival margin (case 1)
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4374310&req=5

Figure 3: (a) Healing at donor site at 36 months: Note the normal form and harmony of gingiva with the adjacent teeth (case 1). (b) Maxillary first molar on the contralateral site: Note the comparable contour of the gingival margin (case 1)
Mentions: At 3 months postoperatively when keratinization is expected to be complete, graft blended well with the adjacent tissues and was not clearly distinguishable [Figure 2a and b]. Increased gingival width following surgical procedure [Table 1, Figure 2c and d] improved oral hygiene and decreased gingival inflammation [Tables 2 and 3]. Gingiva at donor sites regained its normal form and contour at 3 months [Figure 3a and b]. Evaluation of esthetics demonstrated acceptable esthetic results wherein 80% and 60% examiners rated results as excellent for case 1 and case 2, respectively, while rest rated it as very good [Table 4].

Bottom Line: To the best of our knowledge, no such cases have been documented in the literature.This not only improved plaque control but also resulted in acceptable esthetic results over 3 years.It may be concluded that buccal marginal gingiva may provide a predictable substitute to other donor tissues to augment gingiva.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Periodontics and Oral Implantology, Post Graduate Institute of Dental Sciences, Rohtak, Haryana, India.

ABSTRACT
The indications to increase the width of keratinized gingiva have not been proven beyond doubt; however it becomes indispensable in certain clinical situations. Inspite of frequently encountered complications, palate is considered most preferred area to harvest the free gingival graft (FGG). This procedure aimed at investigating the potential of buccal marginal gingiva as a donor to augment keratinized gingiva. To the best of our knowledge, no such cases have been documented in the literature. FGG harvested from maxillary buccal marginal gingiva was used to augment gingiva in the mandibular anterior region for two patients. This not only improved plaque control but also resulted in acceptable esthetic results over 3 years. Furthermore, gingiva at donor sites gained its normal form and was in harmony with the neighboring teeth. It may be concluded that buccal marginal gingiva may provide a predictable substitute to other donor tissues to augment gingiva.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus