Comparison of semilunar coronally repositioned flap with gingival massaging using an Ayurvedic product (irimedadi taila) in the treatment of class-I gingival recession: A clinical study.
Amit Kumar Mishra, Kanteshwari Kumathalli, Raja Sridhar, Rahul Maru, Brijesh Mangal, Sameer Kedia, Ravi Shrihatti
Author Information
Amit Kumar Mishra: Amit Kumar Mishra, ESIC Hospital, Nanda Nagar, Indore (M.P), 125-A, Sai Bagh Colony, Indore, Madhya Pradesh 452001, India.
Kanteshwari Kumathalli: Amit Kumar Mishra, ESIC Hospital, Nanda Nagar, Indore (M.P), 125-A, Sai Bagh Colony, Indore, Madhya Pradesh 452001, India.
Raja Sridhar: Amit Kumar Mishra, ESIC Hospital, Nanda Nagar, Indore (M.P), 125-A, Sai Bagh Colony, Indore, Madhya Pradesh 452001, India.
Rahul Maru: Amit Kumar Mishra, ESIC Hospital, Nanda Nagar, Indore (M.P), 125-A, Sai Bagh Colony, Indore, Madhya Pradesh 452001, India.
Brijesh Mangal: Amit Kumar Mishra, ESIC Hospital, Nanda Nagar, Indore (M.P), 125-A, Sai Bagh Colony, Indore, Madhya Pradesh 452001, India.
Sameer Kedia: Amit Kumar Mishra, ESIC Hospital, Nanda Nagar, Indore (M.P), 125-A, Sai Bagh Colony, Indore, Madhya Pradesh 452001, India.
Ravi Shrihatti: Amit Kumar Mishra, ESIC Hospital, Nanda Nagar, Indore (M.P), 125-A, Sai Bagh Colony, Indore, Madhya Pradesh 452001, India.
AIM: To study the comparison in terms of root coverage the effect of gingival massaging using an ayurvedic product and semilunar coronally repositioned flap (SCRF) to assess the treatment outcomes in the management of Miller's class I gingival recessions over a-6 mo period. METHODS: The present study comprised of total of 90 sites of Miller's class-I gingival recessions in the maxillary anteriors, the sites were divided into three groups each comprising 30 sites, Group I-were treated by massaging using a Placebo (Ghee) Group II-were treated by massaging using an ayurvedic product (irimedadi taila). Group III-were treated by SCRF. Clinical parameters assessed included recession height, recession width, probing pocket depth, width of attached gingiva, clinical attachment level and thickness of keratinized tissue. Clinical recordings were performed at baseline and 6 mo later. The results were analyzed to determine improvements in the clinical parameters. The comparison was done using Wilcoxon signed rank test. The overall differences in the clinical improvements between the three groups was done using Kruskal-Wallis test. The probability value (P-value) of less than 0.01 was considered as statistically significant. RESULTS: Non-surgical periodontal therapy and gingival massaging improves facial gingival recessions and prevents further progression of mucogingival defects. Root coverage was achieved in both the experimental groups. The SCRF group proved to be superior in terms of all the clinical parameters. CONCLUSION: Root coverage is significantly better with semilunar coronally repositioned flap compared with the gingival massaging technique in the treatment of shallow maxillary Miller class I gingival recession defects.
