Loading…

Effects of soft tissue grafting prior to orthodontic treatment on preventing gingival recession in dogs

PURPOSEThis study was conducted to assess the efficacy of prophylactic gingival grafting in the mandibular anterior labial area for preventing orthodontically induced gingival recession. METHODSEight mongrel dogs received gingival graft surgery at the first (I1) and third (I3) mandibular incisors on...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of periodontal & implant science 2020, 50(4), , pp.226-237
Main Authors: Song, Young Woo, Jung, Heekyu, Han, Seo Yeon, Paeng, Kyeong-Won, Kim, Myong Ji, Cha, Jae-Kook, Choi, Yoon Jeong, Jung, Ui-Won
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:PURPOSEThis study was conducted to assess the efficacy of prophylactic gingival grafting in the mandibular anterior labial area for preventing orthodontically induced gingival recession. METHODSEight mongrel dogs received gingival graft surgery at the first (I1) and third (I3) mandibular incisors on both sides based on the following group allocation: AT group (autogenous connective tissue graft on I1), AT-control group (contralateral side in the AT group), CM group (xenogeneic cross-linked collagen matrix graft on I3) and CM-control group (contralateral side in the CM group). At 4 weeks after surgery, 6 incisors were splinted and proclined for 4 weeks, followed by 16 weeks of retention. At 24 weeks after surgery, casts were made and compared with those made before surgery, and radiographic and histomorphometric analyses were performed. RESULTSDespite the proclination of the incisal tip (by approximately 3 mm), labial gingival recession did not occur. The labial gingiva was thicker in the AT group (1.85±0.50 mm vs. 1.76±0.45 mm, P>0.05) and CM group (1.90±0.33 mm vs. 1.79±0.20 mm, P>0.05) than in their respective control groups. CONCLUSIONSThe level of the labial gingival margin did not change following labial proclination of incisors in dogs. Both the AT and CM groups showed enhanced gingival thickness.
ISSN:2093-2278
2093-2286
DOI:10.5051/jpis.2000420021