International Journal of Scientific Research in Dental and Medical Sciences

International Journal of Scientific Research in Dental and Medical Sciences

Gingival Rebound and Healing Following Gingivectomy Using Diode Laser and Conventional Surgery: A Prospective Observational Comparative Study

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Shibu Godfrey Periera 1
Bindu R Nayar 2
Rekha P Radhakrishnan 3
Lekshmi Ajithkumar Jayasree 4
Susanna S Brainerd 5
1 Department of Periodontics, Government Dental College, Thrissur, Kerala, India
2 Department of Periodontics, Government Dental College, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, India
3 Department of Periodontics, Government Dental College, Kottayam, Keraala, India
4 Department of Periodontics, Mar Baselios Dental College, Kothamangalam, Kerala, India
5 Private Office, Delhi, India
10.30485/ijsrdms.2025.509055.1644
Abstract
Background and aim: The healing process after Gingivectomy can vary depending on the technique used, with both diode laser and conventional scalpel methods providing satisfactory results but differing regarding postoperative recovery. Coronal displacement of the gingival margin is a possible and unwanted sequel of the gingivectomy procedure. This study aims to compare the laser and scalpel gingivectomy and determine differences in tissue rebound, healing, postoperative pain, and the need for analgesics post-gingivectomy in these patients.
Material and methods: Thirty-two patients were consecutively recruited into the two groups. The parameters evaluated included pain perceived postoperatively after 30 minutes on the 7th and  14th Day, healing on the 7th, 14th, and  30th Day, gingival tissue rebound on the 14th  and  30th Day, and analgesics required in the postoperative period.
Results: There was a significant difference in gingival index and gingival relapse on the 14th Day and  30th Day between the groups, with a lesser amount of relapse in the laser group. Groups I and II showed statistically significant differences in healing, with the scalpel group recording better healing in all follow-up appointments. There was no significant difference in pain scores and postoperative analgesic intake.  
Conclusions: The study demonstrated that coronal displacement of the gingival margin was comparatively lesser in the laser group, even though it had delayed healing. Combining both techniques might enhance clinical outcomes, particularly in managing gingival inflammation and migration in the initial months following surgery.
Keywords
Crown Lengthening
Gingivectomy
Lasers

Subjects

[1] Agrawal AA. Gingival enlargements: Differential diagnosis and review of literature. World Journal of Clinical Cases: WJCC. 2015;3(9):779-88. https://doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v3.i9.779.
[2] Akram HM, Ali OH, Omran NK, Ali AO. Diode laser versus scalpel gingivectomy. Biomedical and Pharmacology Journal. 2017;10(4):1799-804. https://dx.doi.org/10.13005/bpj/1295.
[3] Kohale BR, Agrawal AA, Raut CP. Effect of low-level laser therapy on wound healing and patients' response after scalpel gingivectomy: A randomized clinical split-mouth study. Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology. 2018;22(5):419-26. https://doi.org/10.4103/jisp.jisp_239_18.
[4] Newman MG, Takei H, Klokkevold PR, Carranza FA. Newman and Carranza's Clinical Periodontology E-Book: Newman and Carranza's Clinical Periodontology E-Book. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2018.
[5] LandryRG, TurnbullRS, Howley T. Effectiveness of benzydamine HCl in the treatment of periodontal post-surgical patients. Res Clin Forums 1988;10:105-18.
[6] Rodriguez AB, Alhachache S, Velasquez D, Chan HL. A systematic review of oral wound healing indices. Plos one. 2024;19(2):e0290050. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0290050.
[7] Coluzzi DJ, Parker SP, editors. Lasers in Dentistry--Current Concepts. Springer Cham. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-43338-2.
[8] Sachelarie L, Cristea R, Burlui E, Hurjui LL. Laser Technology in Dentistry: From Clinical Applications to Future Innovations. Dentistry Journal. 2024;12(12):420. https://doi.org/10.3390/dj12120420.
[9] Maboudi A, Fekrazad R, Shiva A, Salehabadi N, Moosazadeh M, Ehsani H, et al. Gingivectomy with diode laser versus the conventional scalpel surgery and nonsurgical periodontal therapy in treatment of orthodontic treatment-induced gingival enlargement: a systematic review. Photobiomodulation, Photomedicine, and Laser Surgery. 2023;41(9):449-59. https://doi.org/10.1089/photob.2023.0060.
[10] Amaral MB, De Ávila JM, Abreu MH, Mesquita RA. Diode laser surgery versus scalpel surgery in the treatment of fibrous hyperplasia: a randomized clinical trial. International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery. 2015;44(11):1383-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2015.05.015.
[11]  Çayan T, Hasanoğlu Erbaşar GN, Akca G, Kahraman S. Comparative evaluation of diode laser and scalpel surgery in the treatment of inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia: a split-mouth study. Photobiomodulation, photomedicine, and laser surgery. 2019;37(2):91-8. https://doi.org/10.1089/photob.2018.4522.
[12] Ganji KK, Patil VA, John J. A comparative evaluation for biologic width following surgical crown lengthening using gingivectomy and ostectomy procedure. International journal of dentistry. 2012;2012(1):479241. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/479241.
[13] Arora R, Narula SC, Sharma RK, Tewari S. Evaluation of supracrestal gingival tissue after surgical crown lengthening: a 6‐month clinical study. Journal of periodontology. 2013;84(7):934-40. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2012.120162.
[14] Abdullah A, Romanos PG, Dent M. Laser-assisted esthetic crown lengthening: open-flap versus flapless. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2022;42(1):53-62. https://doi.org/10.11607/prd.5335.
[15] Tianmitrapap P, Srisuwantha R, Laosrisin N. Flapless Er, Cr: YSGG laser versus traditional flap in crown lengthening procedure. Journal of Dental Sciences. 2022;17(1):89-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jds.2021.05.004.
[16] Narayan S, Rajasekar A. Soft tissue re-growth after different crown lengthening techniques among Indian patients. Bioinformation. 2021;17(12):1130-3. https://doi.org/10.6026/973206300171130.
[17] Smith SC, Goh R, Ma S, Nogueira GR, Atieh M, Tawse-Smith A. Periodontal tissue changes after crown lengthening surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The Saudi dental journal. 2023;35(4):294-304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sdentj.2023.03.004.
 [18] Júnior RM, Gueiros LA, Silva IH, de Albuquerque Carvalho A, Leão JC. Labial frenectomy with Nd: YAG laser and conventional surgery: a comparative study. Lasers in medical science. 2015;30:851-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-013-1461-8.
[19] Evans DH, Abrahamse H. Efficacy of three different laser wavelengths for in vitro wound healing. Photodermatology, photoimmunology & photomedicine. 2008;24(4):199-210. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0781.2008.00362.x.
[20] Elanchezhiyan S, Renukadevi R, Vennila K. Comparison of diode laser-assisted surgery and conventional surgery in the management of hereditary ankyloglossia in siblings: a case report with scientific review. Lasers in medical science. 2013;28(1):7-12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-011-1047-2.
International Journal of Scientific Research in Dental and Medical Sciences
Volume 7, Issue 1
Winter 2025
Pages 7-11

  • Receive Date 18 January 2025
  • Revise Date 21 February 2025
  • Accept Date 27 February 2025
  • Publish Date 02 March 2025