MedTrace Logo

Clinical Evaluation of Conventional Versus Microsurgical Techniques of Esthetic Crown Lengthening

NCT03804281 · Status: UNKNOWN · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 24

Last updated 2019-01-18

No results posted yet for this study

Summary

the study compare gingival margin stability following conventional approach versus microsurgical approach of esthetic crown lengthening in management of patients with short clinical crowns in the upper anterior region.In management of patients with short clinical crowns in the upper anterior region, there is no difference in gingival margin stability between conventional and microsurgical approaches of esthetic crown lengthening.

Conditions

  • Gummy Smile

Interventions

PROCEDURE

Test group

The surgery will be done with the use of 4x magnification loop, the knives are micro blades and micro-sutures 7//0 used with the microsurgical instruments kit

PROCEDURE

Control group

esthetic crown lengthening with conventional approach with an internal bevel incision, following CEJ anatomy, this will be followed by an intra-sulcular incision, removal of the strip of outlined marginal gingiva and elevation of a mucoperiosteal flap to the level of the alveolar bone crest.

Sponsors & Collaborators

  • Cairo University

    lead OTHER

Study Design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Model
PARALLEL

Eligibility

Min Age
18 Years
Sex
ALL
Healthy Volunteers
Yes

Timeline & Regulatory

Start
2019-02-01
Primary Completion
2020-01-01
Completion
2020-08-01

More Related Trials

Read the full study record

This page highlights key information. For complete eligibility criteria, study locations, investigator contacts, and the full protocol, visit the original record on ClinicalTrials.gov.

View NCT03804281 on ClinicalTrials.gov