Comparison Between Free Gingival Graft and Palatal Pedicle Flap (NCT06816680) | Clinical Trial Compass
CompletedNot Applicable
Comparison Between Free Gingival Graft and Palatal Pedicle Flap
Taiwan30 participantsStarted 2021-06-27
Plain-language summary
Patients requiring KMW gain(mm) during uncovering surgery were included. Two surgical methods were compared: apically position flap with free gingival graft (FGG group) and the palatal pedicle flap with collagen matrix (PPF group). The primary outcomes were KMW amount(mm) and shrinkage rate(%) at 2 weeks (2W) and 2 months (2M), 3 months (3ML), and 6 months after loading (6ML). Secondary outcomes included the intra- and inter- group comparison in mucosal recession (REC, mm), probing pocket depth (PPD, mm), marginal bone level (MBL, mm) and restoration designs.
Who can participate
Age range47 Years – 71 Years
SexALL
See this in plain English?
AI-rewrites the medical criteria so a patient or caregiver can understand them. Always confirm with the trial site.
Inclusion criteria
✓. Patient had at least one bone-level 3i implant\*: 3.25, 4, and 5 mm in diameter, 8.5, 10, and 11.5 mm in length, and primary stability with an insertion torque ≥ 20Ncm. All implants needed to be free of peri-implant disease.
✓. Informed consent had been obtained prior to implant uncovering.
✓. Insufficient keratinized mucosal width (KMW\< 2mm) was observed
✓. Complete data, including both clinical and radiographic outcomes, was available
✓. The patient followed the supportive postimplant regimen for a 12-month loading period, indicating good compliance.
Exclusion criteria
✕. Untreated periodontitis.
✕. Uncontrolled systemic disease, such as hypertension, diabetes, and heavy smokers (more than 10 pieces per day).
✕. History of radiation therapy on head and neck regions.
✕. Patient with pregnancy
What they're measuring
1
Keratinized mucosal width amount(mm)
Timeframe: at 2 weeks (2W) and 2 months (2M), 3 months (3ML), and 6 months after loading (6ML)