Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology
Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology
Home | About JISP | Search | Accepted articles | Online Early | Current Issue | Archives | Instructions | SubmissionSubscribeLogin 
Users Online: 597  Home Print this page Email this page Small font size Default font size Increase font sizeWide layoutNarrow layoutFull screen layout
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 22  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 140-149

Evaluation of periosteum eversion and coronally advanced flap techniques in the treatment of isolated Miller's Class I/II gingival recession: A comparative clinical study

Department of Periodontology, The Oxford Dental College, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Koel Debnath
#106, Block-B, GK Jewel City Apartment, Kudlu Harlur Main Road, Kudlu, Bengaluru - 560 068, Karnataka
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/jisp.jisp_5_18

Rights and Permissions

Aim: The present investigation aimed to evaluate root coverage (RC) with periosteum eversion technique (PET) using periosteum as a graft and coronally advanced flap (CAF) with platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) membrane as a graft in the treatment of isolated Miller's class I and II gingival recession defects. Materials and Methods: Thirty sites in 15 participants with Miller's Class I or II gingival recession were randomly treated either with PET using periosteum as graft and CAF + PRF as graft. In a split mouth design, the parameters such as recession depth, recession width at cementoenamel junction, probing depth, periodontal attachment level (PAL), and keratinized gingival width were assessed at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months postoperative follow-up with William's graduated probe and Vernier caliper. Results: Both the treatment modalities yielded statistically nonsignificant desirable treatment outcomes at both postoperative levels in terms of all the parameters The mean RC with probe method and Vernier method in CAF + PRF was 75.01% and 86.86%, respectively, and PET showed a mean RC of 61.112% and 83.971%, respectively, at 6-month interval period which showed a nonstatistically significant difference. Conclusion: Both the treatment modalities, i.e., CAF + PRF and PET are essentially and equally effective in the treatment of Miller's Class I or II gingival recession defects.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded409    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 1    

Recommend this journal