search
Back to results

Flapless Esthetic Crown Lengthening for the Treatment of Excessive Gingival Display

Primary Purpose

Gingival Overgrowth

Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Brazil
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Open-flap
Flapless
Sponsored by
University of Guarulhos
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional treatment trial for Gingival Overgrowth focused on measuring crown lengthening, gingivoplasty, surgical procedures, gingivectomy, esthetic surgery

Eligibility Criteria

21 Years - 35 Years (Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • esthetic concerns regarding excessive gingival display due to altered passive eruption in at least three upper teeth (incisors, lateral, canines or premolars) per half contralateral quadrant.
  • > 21 years old,
  • at least 20 teeth
  • no sites with attachment loss and probing depth (PD) > 3 mm
  • full-mouth plaque, bleeding on probing (BoP) and marginal bleeding (MB) index scores of < 15%

Exclusion Criteria:

  • pregnancy
  • lactation
  • history of smoking
  • antimicrobial and anti-inflammatory therapies in the previous 2 months
  • previous mucogingival surgery at the region to be treated
  • systemic conditions that could affect tissue healing (e.g. diabetes)
  • use of orthodontic appliances

Sites / Locations

  • Guarulhos University

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm Type

Active Comparator

Active Comparator

Arm Label

Flapless

Open-flap

Arm Description

Flapless: Gingivectomy and osteoplasty, as necessary, will be performed without flap elevation.

Gingivectomy and osteoplasty, as necessary, will be performed with flap elevation

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Mean changes in gingival margin

Secondary Outcome Measures

Visible plaque accumulation
Marginal bleeding
Bleeding on probing
Probing depth
Clinical attachment level
Keratinized gingiva height
Patient perceptions
RANKL levels
OPG levels

Full Information

First Posted
March 26, 2013
Last Updated
March 29, 2013
Sponsor
University of Guarulhos
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT01821157
Brief Title
Flapless Esthetic Crown Lengthening for the Treatment of Excessive Gingival Display
Official Title
Open-flap Versus Flapless Esthetic Crown Lengthening: 12-month Clinical Outcomes of a Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
March 2013
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
January 2011 (undefined)
Primary Completion Date
July 2012 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
July 2012 (Actual)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Principal Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
University of Guarulhos

4. Oversight

Data Monitoring Committee
Yes

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
The aim of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes of open-flap (OF) and flapless (FL) esthetic crown lengthening (ECL) for the treatment of excessive gingival display (EGD). It was hypothesized that the FL surgery would yield similar clinical results to the OF technique up to 12 months. Methods: A split-mouth randomized controlled trial will be conducted in 28 subjects presenting EGD. Contralateral quadrants will receive ECL using OF or FL techniques. Clinical parameters will be evaluated at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months post-surgeries. The local levels of receptor activator of NF-КB ligand (RANKL) and osteoprotegerin (OPG) will be assessed by ELISA at baseline and 3 months. Patients' perceptions regarding morbidity and esthetical appearance will be also evaluated. Periodontal tissue dimensions will be obtained by computed tomography at baseline and correlated with the changes in the gingival margin (GM).
Detailed Description
Experimental design and treatment protocols In this prospective, split-mouth, randomized controlled clinical study, 28 subjects (21 - 40 years old) requiring correction of EGD will received ECL using OF and FL techniques. A computer-generated table randomly distributed the right quadrant to receive OF or FL techniques. Consequently, the contralateral left quadrant was allocated to the other group. The following treatments were performed: OF (control group; n=28 sides/105 teeth): An internal beveled incision was performed at the buccal aspect of the involved teeth. Afterwards, a sulcular incision was completed to allow gingival tissue removal. A full-thickness mucoperiosteal flap was reflected to remove and remodel bone tissue by means of surgical chisels, as necessary, until a 3mm distance was achieved between the bone crest and the cement-enamel junction (CEJ). The exposed root surfaces were carefully planed with curettes. Interrupted sutures were performed at the papilla to allow GM stabilization in the CEJ position. FL (test group; n=28 sides/105 teeth): Internal beveled and sulcular incisions and gingival tissue removal were performed as above described for the control group, replacing the GM in the CEJ position. However, the alveolar bone was removed and remodeled, as necessary, using micro chisels, via incisions, without flap elevation. The root surfaces were also carefully planed via incisions. The required distance of 3mm between the bone crest and the CEJ was checked by inserting a periodontal probe into the incision. Sutures were not performed. After both procedures, canines and central incisors should be at the same length, and the lateral incisor should be 1mm shorter. The same periodontist (F.R.V.) performed all surgeries. Chlorhexidine gluconate mouthwash (0.12%) was prescribed 2x/day for 2 weeks. Analgesics were prescribed to control possible postoperative discomfort. The sutures of control quadrants were removed after 7 days. The surgical time for test and control, starting after anesthesia, was computed. Examiner calibration Clinical examinations were performed by one trained examiner (D.H.), calibrated as previously described13. The intra-examiner variability was 0.16 mm for PD and 0.18 mm for CAL. The parameters registered dichotomously (e.g. BoP) were calculated by the Kappa-Light test and the intra-examiner agreement was > 0.85. Clinical monitoring Periodontal measurements were performed using a manual probe . An individual stent of ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymer was used as a reference point for some clinical parameters. Grooves were drilled in the stent to standardize the localization and direction of the probe. The following parameters were assessed on the mesio-buccal, middle-buccal and disto-buccal aspect of all included teeth at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months post-surgeries: plaque accumulation (PI)12; MB: bleeding up to 15 seconds after probing along GM; BoP: bleeding up to 15 seconds after probing, at least 1 min following MB recording; PD: distance between the GM and the bottom of the gingival sulcus; Relative GM (rGM): distance from a fixed landmark in the stent to the most cervical point of the GM; Relative CAL (rCAL): distance from a fixed landmark in the stent to the bottom of the gingival sulcus; Keratinized gingiva height (KGH): distance from the GM to the mucogingival line. rGM was also assessed immediately after surgery. The relative bone level (rBL, i.e. the distance between a fixed landmark in the stent and the bone crest [BC]) was recorded before and after the surgical procedures. Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) To evaluate the effects of surgeries on alveolar bone remodeling, the gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) levels of receptor activator of NF-КB ligand (RANKL) and osteoprotegerin (OPG) were assessed. One site from each quadrant was randomly chosen for GCF sampling at baseline and at 3 months post-surgeries. The GCF sampling protocol and volume measurement were performed as previously described14. The strips were stored at -80ºC for subsequent assays. GCF samples were analyzed by ELISA for soluble RANKL (sRANKL) and OPG using commercially available ELISA kits , according to the manufacturer's recommendations14. Results were reported as total amount (pg) and concentration (pg/µl of GCF) of protein. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) To evaluate the hard and soft tissues of the buccal periodontal apparatus, a soft tissue CBCT (ST-CBCT) was performed as previously described15. At baseline, the CBCT scans were taken with an iCATǁ and the images (sections of 1.0 mm apart) were acquired using suitable software. Briefly, the individuals were submitted to a regular CBCT scan, wearing a plastic lip retractor in an inverted position and retracting their tongues toward the floor of the mouth. These procedures prevented the interference of the soft tissues of the lips, cheeks and tongue in the gingival tissue. The following measurements were obtained in the buccal aspect of the middle image section of each tooth with a digital caliper rule: bone thickness (BT, the width of the buccal bone at a distance of 3 mm apical to the bone crest), CEJ to BC distance (CEJ-BC), gingival thickness (GT, the width of the buccal gingival tissue at a distance of 3 mm apical to the bone crest), GM to BC distance (GM-BC) and CEJ to GM distance (CEJ-GM). Patient perceptions Patient perceptions regarding morbidity and esthetic satisfaction were evaluated with a questionnaire administered by an assistant (TSM). The questionnaire was obtained upon completion of the procedure (pain) and at 7 days (pain/discomfort, swelling, hematoma, esthetical appearance) and 6 months post-surgery (esthetical appearance). Responses were quantified with a visual analogue scale (VAS) of 100 mm in which 0 indicated 'no' and 100 'plenty.' In addition, at 7 days and 6 months post-surgery, a questionnaire recorded patient satisfaction regarding the type of treatment, in terms of esthetical appearance by selecting one of the following choices: totally satisfied, partially satisfied or unsatisfied. Statistical Analysis To validate the clinical comparisons of this paper, a post hoc power calculation was performed based on differences of 0.5mm in GM between groups at 12 months post-surgery. Since there is no previous study comparing OF and FL techniques, we established that a difference of 0.5mm in GM between both approaches could be a relevant clinical parameter to perform the power size calculation. In addition, a standard deviation (SD) of 0.5 mm was determined based on the observed SD of the difference in GM changes between groups at 12 months, considering all buccal sites (interproximal- plus middle-buccal sites). Based on these data, it was determined that 16 subjects per group would be necessary to provide an 80% power with an alpha of 0.05. Since 28 subjects met the inclusion criteria, these were all included in the study. The power calculation took into account the split-mouth design16. Data were examined for normality by the Shapiro-Wilk test. The data that did not achieve normality were analyzed using non-parametric methods. The mean percentage of sites with visible plaque accumulation, MB, BoP and the mean PD, rGM, rCAL, KGH and rBL were computed, separately, for interproximal- and middle-buccal sites of control and test sides. Interproximal sites included the mean of mesio- and disto-buccal measurements. The changes in the rGM from baseline to immediately after surgery, 3, 6 and 12 months and in rBL from baseline to immediately after surgery were calculated for both groups. Clinical differences between groups were compared using the paired Student's t-test. Repeated measures ANOVA and Tukey test were employed to detect differences within each group among time-points. The Mann-Whitney test was used to evaluate VAS scores of patient's perceptions. The satisfaction in terms of esthetical appearance was compared by the χ2test. RANKL and OPG differences between groups and time-points were compared using the Wilcoxon test. A model of multiple linear regression (MLR) analysis was performed to estimate the association between the dimensions of the soft and bone tissues obtained by ST-CBCT, the treatment modalities and the changes in the GM. The outcome variable in this model was the nonappearance of creeping attachment of the GM in a coronal direction, at 12 months, from the position defined immediately after surgery (yes/no). The predictor variables included the surgical modalities and the tomography measurements. The level of significance was set at 5% for all analyses.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Gingival Overgrowth
Keywords
crown lengthening, gingivoplasty, surgical procedures, gingivectomy, esthetic surgery

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Treatment
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Single Group Assignment
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
28 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Flapless
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
Flapless: Gingivectomy and osteoplasty, as necessary, will be performed without flap elevation.
Arm Title
Open-flap
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
Gingivectomy and osteoplasty, as necessary, will be performed with flap elevation
Intervention Type
Procedure
Intervention Name(s)
Open-flap
Intervention Description
Open-flap(control group; n=28 sides/105 teeth): An internal beveled incision was performed at the buccal aspect of the involved teeth. Afterwards, a sulcular incision was completed to allow gingival tissue removal. A full-thickness mucoperiosteal flap was reflected to remove and remodel bone tissue by means of surgical chisels, as necessary, until a 3mm distance was achieved between the bone crest and the cement-enamel junction (CEJ). The exposed root surfaces were carefully planed with curettes. Interrupted sutures were performed at the papilla to allow GM stabilization in the CEJ position.
Intervention Type
Procedure
Intervention Name(s)
Flapless
Intervention Description
FL (test group; n=28 sides/105 teeth): Internal beveled and sulcular incisions and gingival tissue removal were performed as above described for the control group, replacing the GM in the CEJ position. However, the alveolar bone was removed and remodeled, as necessary, using micro chisels, via incisions, without flap elevation. The root surfaces were also carefully planed via incisions. The required distance of 3mm between the bone crest and the CEJ was checked by inserting a periodontal probe into the incision. Sutures were not performed.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Mean changes in gingival margin
Time Frame
Baseline to 3, 6 and 12 months
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Visible plaque accumulation
Time Frame
Baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months
Title
Marginal bleeding
Time Frame
Baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months
Title
Bleeding on probing
Time Frame
Baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months
Title
Probing depth
Time Frame
Baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months
Title
Clinical attachment level
Time Frame
Baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months
Title
Keratinized gingiva height
Time Frame
Baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months
Title
Patient perceptions
Time Frame
Baseline, 7 days and 6 months
Title
RANKL levels
Time Frame
Baseline and 3 months
Title
OPG levels
Time Frame
Baseline and 3 months

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
21 Years
Maximum Age & Unit of Time
35 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: esthetic concerns regarding excessive gingival display due to altered passive eruption in at least three upper teeth (incisors, lateral, canines or premolars) per half contralateral quadrant. > 21 years old, at least 20 teeth no sites with attachment loss and probing depth (PD) > 3 mm full-mouth plaque, bleeding on probing (BoP) and marginal bleeding (MB) index scores of < 15% Exclusion Criteria: pregnancy lactation history of smoking antimicrobial and anti-inflammatory therapies in the previous 2 months previous mucogingival surgery at the region to be treated systemic conditions that could affect tissue healing (e.g. diabetes) use of orthodontic appliances
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Poliana M Duarte, DDS
Organizational Affiliation
Guarulhos University
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Guarulhos University
City
Guarulhos
State/Province
SP
ZIP/Postal Code
07023-070
Country
Brazil

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Citations:
PubMed Identifier
9533335
Citation
Levine RA, McGuire M. The diagnosis and treatment of the gummy smile. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 1997 Aug;18(8):757-62, 764; quiz 766.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
19898712
Citation
Silberberg N, Goldstein M, Smidt A. Excessive gingival display--etiology, diagnosis, and treatment modalities. Quintessence Int. 2009 Nov-Dec;40(10):809-18.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
19655539
Citation
Rossi R, Benedetti R, Santos-Morales RI. Treatment of altered passive eruption: periodontal plastic surgery of the dentogingival junction. Eur J Esthet Dent. 2008 Autumn;3(3):212-23.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
20476885
Citation
Rethman MP, Harrel SK. Minimally invasive periodontal therapy: will periodontal therapy remain a technologic laggard? J Periodontol. 2010 Oct;81(10):1390-5. doi: 10.1902/jop.2010.100150.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
23137007
Citation
Malkinson S, Waldrop TC, Gunsolley JC, Lanning SK, Sabatini R. The effect of esthetic crown lengthening on perceptions of a patient's attractiveness, friendliness, trustworthiness, intelligence, and self-confidence. J Periodontol. 2013 Aug;84(8):1126-33. doi: 10.1902/jop.2012.120403. Epub 2012 Nov 9.
Results Reference
background

Learn more about this trial

Flapless Esthetic Crown Lengthening for the Treatment of Excessive Gingival Display

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs