Clinical evaluation for treatment of chronic inflammatory gingival enlargement using Diode Laser versus Electrocautery gingivectomy | ||||
| Egyptian Dental Journal | ||||
| Article 8, Volume 66, Issue 1 - January (Oral Medicine, X-Ray, Oral Biology & Oral Pathology), January 2020, Page 225-235 PDF (2.69 MB) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/edj.2020.77538 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
| Ahmed Dardir Mohamed1; Lama H. Marssafy2 | ||||
| 1Assistant Professor of Oral Medicine, Oral Diagnosis and Periodontology, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine, Ahram Canadian University, Egypt and Umm- Al-Qura University, KSA, | ||||
| 2Assistant Professor of Oral Medicine, Oral Diagnosis and Periodontology, Department of Basic and Clinical Oral Sciences, Collage of Dentistry, Umm Al Qura University, KSA. | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Introduction: Management of gingival enlargement starts with conventional periodontal treatment and might be followed by surgical intervention to return the gingiva to its normal anatomical and physiological contour. Gingivectomy can be done by various techniques as laser and electrocautery. Diode laser as a semiconductor transfer electrical energy into light energy allowing easy manipulation of soft tissue. Electrocautery is a controlled, precise application of heat used with carefully designed electrodes. Materials and Methods: A split mouth study design was done on ten patients having bilaterally symmetrical gingival hyperplasia in lower anterior teeth due to chronic inflammatory gingival enlargement. In each patient, gingivectomy was done with diode laser at the right side and electrocautery at the left side. Results: Intraoperative parameters included haemostasis and duration of surgery which showed no significant difference between both sides while laser showed significant improvement over electrocautery regarding instrument sticking. Postoperative parameters included pain which showed statically significant difference between both sides at 72hs in favor of electrocautery side, and healing index (HI) which showed no significant difference between both sides at 72hs, one week and one month postoperatively. Conclusion: Both treatment modalities were efficient in performing gingivectomy however, Electrocautery was superior to diode laser regarding postoperative pain and diode laser has advantage over electrocautery regarding instrument performance and showed better improvement in healing process. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Gingivectomy; Diode laser; Electrocautery | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 928 PDF Download: 1,526 |
||||
