Postoperative Complications Following Gingival Grafts: A Prospective Cohort Study

Aim : Treating gingival recessions (GRs) is a challenge for the practitioner who must take into consideration objective clinical factors, subjective symptoms and also factors related to the patient’s expectations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the postoperative complications associated with connective tissue graft (CTG) plus coronally advanced flap (CAF) and free gingival graft (FGG) used to cover GRs and to compare post-operative morbidities for the two groups of procedures. Material and Methods: A total of 17 patients diagnosed with GRs ≥2mm were treated using CTG plus CAF or FGG. Post-operative complications were evaluated with a questionnaire given to the patients at 14 days follow-up visit. The study used a 1 to 10 visual analogic scale (VAS) and the levels of outcomes were classified as “none to minimum” “moderate” and “very important/severe”. Results : A total of 21 procedures, 10 CTG plus CAG and 11 FGG were included in the analysis. No palatal bleeding and no severe pain or swelling were recorded. The patients experienced more pain in the grafted area than in the donor area, for both surgical techniques, with a mean value of 3.09 (1.3 sd) versus 2.27 (1.4 sd) for CTG plus CAF group and of 3.7 (2.21 sd) versus 2.9 (1.7 sd) for FGG group, respectively. CTG plus CAF generated significantly higher scores of tumefaction than FGG, the mean values being 2.45 (0.93 sd) and 4 (2.21 sd) (t value 2.12, p<0.05) respectively. Conclusion : The complications associated with the two periodontal surgical approaches seem manageable and clinically acceptable.

[1]  D. Kim Periodontal plastic surgery procedures reduce localized gingival recession defects. , 2011, Journal of the American Dental Association.

[2]  Holly L. Lorenz,et al.  A Patient-Centered Model to Improve Metrics Without Cost Increase: Viewing All Care Through the Eyes of Patients and Families , 2010, The Journal of nursing administration.

[3]  C. Mazzotti,et al.  Patient morbidity and root coverage outcome after subepithelial connective tissue and de-epithelialized grafts: a comparative randomized-controlled clinical trial. , 2010, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[4]  L. Chambrone,et al.  Can subepithelial connective tissue grafts be considered the gold standard procedure in the treatment of Miller Class I and II recession-type defects? , 2008, Journal of dentistry.

[5]  P. Damoulis,et al.  Postoperative complications following gingival augmentation procedures. , 2006, Journal of periodontology.

[6]  Randall J. Harris,et al.  Complications with surgical procedures utilizing connective tissue grafts: a follow-up of 500 consecutively treated cases. , 2005, The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry.

[7]  Pasquinelli Lk Periodontal plastic surgery as an adjunctive therapeutic modality for esthetic restorative dentistry. , 2005 .

[8]  M. Sanz,et al.  Periodontal plastic surgery for treatment of localized gingival recessions: a systematic review. , 2002, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[9]  E. B. Kenney,et al.  The use of free gingival grafts for aesthetic purposes. , 2001, Periodontology 2000.

[10]  B. Langer,et al.  Subepithelial connective tissue graft technique for root coverage. , 1985, Journal of periodontology.

[11]  R. Hutchinson,et al.  The incidence and severity of complications and pain following periodontal surgery. , 1985, Journal of periodontology.

[12]  Miller Pd Root coverage using the free soft tissue autograft following citric acid application. III. A successful and predictable procedure in areas of deep-wide recession. , 1985 .

[13]  P. Miller,et al.  A classification of marginal tissue recession. , 1985, The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry.

[14]  T. O'Leary,et al.  The plaque control record. , 1972, Journal of periodontology.