Treatment of multiple gingival recession defects using periosteal pedicle graft: a case series.

Department of Periodontics, Himachal Pradesh Government Dental College, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, India.
Journal of Periodontology (Impact Factor: 2.57). 10/2010; 81(10):1426-31. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2010.100134
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The periosteum is a highly vascular connective tissue with immense regenerative potential. These qualities make it a suitable autogenous graft. A technique is described for using an autogenous periosteal pedicle graft (PPG) for the treatment of multiple gingival recession defects.
Twenty teeth in six subjects with Miller Class I and II recessions ≥ 2 mm were treated using PPGs. In addition to the depth of the gingival recession defect, the probing depth and widths of keratinized and attached gingiva were recorded. The mean +/- SD was calculated for each of the clinical parameters. The paired t test was used to test the significance of the change.
At the end of 1 year, 90.95% of root coverage was attained with a significant increase in the widths of keratinized and attached gingiva (P = 0.0001); no change was observed in probing depths (P = 0.36).
The PPG technique can be successfully used for the treatment of multiple gingival recession defects.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Gingival recession along with reduced width of attached gingiva and inadequate vestibular depth is a very common finding. Many techniques have been adopted in order to treat such defects and obtain predictable root coverage. Several graft procedures are used to obtain the coverage, but they have not been able to deliver predictable and satisfactory results (except connective tissue graft). Some of them also resulted in the secondary surgical site that was very uncomfortable for the patients. There was an intense need for a technique that provides not only good and predictable root coverage, but also reduces the need for secondary surgical site. Hence, this paper describes a single stage technique for increasing the width of attached gingiva and root coverage by using the periosteal pedicle graft.
    Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology 02/2015; 19(1):99-102. DOI:10.4103/0972-124X.145828
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Post-operative complications following flap surgeries or mucogingival procedures are important factors influencing patient's perception of periodontal procedures. Hence, it is important to foresee such complications and take adequate measures pre- and post-operatively. We treated five consecutive cases of gingival recession in the maxillary canine-premolar area using the inverted periosteal graft with a coronally positioned flap technique. Following each of these surgeries, the patients complained of post-operative swelling the next day involving the canine space or buccal space area. The swelling persisted for at least 5 days, however, it was painless. This paper highlights the post-operative complications associated with the said procedure and makes a case for detail enquiry in the form of controlled studies.
    Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology 01/2014; 18(1):82-4. DOI:10.4103/0972-124X.128197
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective:The purpose of the study was to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of periosteum as a barrier membrane for the treatment of intrabony defects.Materials and Methods:The study was conducted in patients having bilateral intrabony defects. A total of 20 intrabony defects in 10 patients were treated, out of which 10 defects received periosteal barrier and the other 10 defects received conventional open flap debridement procedure. The efficacy of the treatment was assessed using clinical parameters and dentascan.Results:Statistically significant gain in clinical attachment level (CAL) was found in the test group (2.00 ± 0.26 mm) as compared to the control group (0.60 ± 0.22 mm). In both the treatment modalities (test and control groups), a significant decrease in probing pocket depth of 3.90 ± 0.35 mm and 2.90 ± 0.31 mm was observed, respectively. The difference between the two groups was not statistically significant. Bone defect fill was 1.40 ± 0.16 mm for the test group and 0.90 ± 0.18 mm for the control group, but the difference observed was not statistically significant.Conclusion:The results of this study show that periosteal barrier membrane can be a better alternative of barrier membranes for the treatment of intrabony defects.
    Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology 05/2014; 18(3):331-5. DOI:10.4103/0972-124X.134571

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Jun 4, 2014