Dental Journal of Advance Studies

Register      Login

VOLUME 11 , ISSUE 1 ( January-April, 2023 ) > List of Articles


Gingival Augmentation Apical to Recession Using Periosteal Fenestration Technique vs Free Mucosal Graft: A Comparative Study

Dinkar Khanna, Nitin Dani, Shivani Khanna, Jatinder Mohan Arora

Keywords : Free mucosal graft, Gingival augmentation, Periosteal fenestration

Citation Information : Khanna D, Dani N, Khanna S, Arora JM. Gingival Augmentation Apical to Recession Using Periosteal Fenestration Technique vs Free Mucosal Graft: A Comparative Study. 2023; 11 (1):1-5.

DOI: 10.5005/djas-11014-0008

License: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

Published Online: 27-06-2023

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2023; The Author(s).


Background: Inadequate width of attached gingiva appears to affect the efficiency of oral hygiene practice. There are numerous surgical procedures for gingival augmentation, though free mucosal graft is considered the “Gold Standard” for increasing the attached gingival width. This procedure has some drawbacks, such as compromised postoperative esthetics, donor site morbidity, and postoperative discomfort. The periosteal fenestration has been used in the past to augment the gingiva apical to recession. This study was conducted to evaluate the width of attached gingiva and other parameters after the periosteal fenestration procedure compared with a free mucosal graft. Materials and methods: This study included 30 patients with insufficient width of attached gingiva. All the patients were randomly divided into two groups, group I as periosteal fenestration and group II as free mucosal graft. Surgical procedure was performed. Clinical parameters were measured at baseline, 1 week, 3 months, and 6 months. Results: The results of our study showed that both procedures were equally effective in increasing the dimensions of attached gingiva. The mean increased amount at 3 months was 3.4 mm in the periosteal fenestration group and 4.0 mm in the free mucosal graft group. Other parameters, such as pain, swelling, and discomfort also showed significant results. Conclusion: The periosteal fenestration technique is a quick and safe procedure capable of augmenting attached tissue with excellent clinical outcomes as compared with the free mucosal graft surgery.

  1. Coslet JG, Rosenberg ES, Tisot R. The free autogenous gingival graft. Dent Clin North Am 1980;24(4):651–682. PMID: 7000559.
  2. Soben P. Essentials of Preventive and Community Dentistry. 2nd edition. India: Arya Publishing House. 2003. pp. 127–140.
  3. Fermin A. Carranza, Michael G. Newman, Henry H, et al. Carranza's Clinical Periodontology, 10th edition. W. B. Saunders. P. 554. Saunders Elsevier, St. Louis, Mo., ©2006.
  4. Eger T, Muller HP, Heinecke A. Ultrasonic determination of gingival thickness. Subject variation and influence of tooth type and clinical features. J Clin Periodontol 1996;23(9):839–845. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1996.tb00621.x.
  5. Huang L-H, Neiva REF, Soehren SE, et al. Effect of platelet rich plasma on the coronally advanced flap root coverage procedure: A pilot human trial. J Periodontol 2005;76(10):1768–1777. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2005.76.10.1768.
  6. Mormann W, Schaer F, Firestone AC. The relationship between success of free gingival grafts and transplant thickness. Revascularization and shrinkage--a one year clinical study. J Periodontol 1981;52(2):74–80. DOI: 10.1902/jop.1981.52.2.74.
  7. Hall WB. The current status of mucogingival problems and their therapy. J Periodontol 1981;52(9):569–575. DOI: 10.1902/jop.1981.52.9.569.
  8. Lang NP, Loe H. The relationship between the width of keratinized gingiva and gingival health. J Periodontol 1972;43(10):623–627. DOI: 10.1902/jop.1972.43.10.623.
  9. Davies RM, Downer MC, Hull PS, et al. Alveolar defects in human skulls. J Clin. Periodontol 1974;1(2):107–111. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1974.tb01245.x.
  10. Robinson RE, Agnew RG. Periosteal Fenestration at the mucogingival line. J Periodontol 1963;34(6):21–29. DOI: 10.1902/jop.1963.34.6.503.
  11. Carranza FA, Carraro JJ. Effect of removal of periosteum on post-operative results of mucogingival surgery. J Periodontol 1963; 34(3):223–226. DOI: 10.1902/jop.1963.34.3.223.
  12. Bowers GM. A study of the width of attached gingiva. J Periodontol 1963;34:201–209. DOI: 10.1902/jop.1963.34.3.201.
  13. Allen DL, Shell JH. Clinical and radiographic evaluation of a periosteal separation procedure. J Periodontol 1968;39(5):290–5. DOI: 10.1902/jop.1968.39.5.290.
  14. Fermin A. Carranza, Michael G. Newman, Henry H, et al. Carranza's Clinical Periodontology. 10th edition. W. B. Saunders. p. 1014. Saunders Elsevier, St. Louis, Mo., ©2006.
  15. Brasher JW, Rees TD, Boyce WA. Complications of free grafts of masticatory mucosa. J Periodontol 1975;46(3):133–138. DOI: 10.1902/jop.1975.46.3.133.
  16. Karring T, Ostergaard E, Loe H. Conservation of tissue specificity after heterotopic transplantation of gingiva and alveolar mucosa. J Periodont Res 1971;6(4):282–293. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0765.1971.tb00619.x.
  17. Camargo PM, Melnick PR, Kenney EB. The use of free gingival grafts for aesthetic purposes. Periodontol 2000 2001;27:72–96. DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0757.2001.027001072.x.
  18. Klingsberg J. Periodontal scleral grafts and combined grafts of sclera and bone: two year appraisal. J Periodontol 1974;45(5):262–272. DOI: 10.1902/jop.1974.
  19. Wei PC, Laurell L, Geivelis M, et al. Acellular dermal matrix allografts to achieve increased attached gingiva. Part 1. A clinical study. J Periodontol 2000;71(8):1297–1305. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2000.71.8.1297.
  20. Robinson, RE. Periosteal fenestration in mucogingival surgery. J West Soc Periodontol 1961;9:107.
  21. Corn H. Periosteal separation: Its clinical significance. J Periodontol 1962;33:140. DOI: 10.1902/jop.1962.33.2.140.
  22. Kennedy JE, Bird WC, Palcanis KG, et al. A longitudinal evaluation of varying widths of attached gingiva. J Clin Periodontol 1985;12(8):667–675. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1985.tb00938.x.
  23. Goldman, Cohen ES. Atlas of Cosmetic and Reconstructive Periodontal Surgery in Cohen ES. 3rd edition., Hamilton, Ontario: BC Decker Inc. 2007. pp. 45–87.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.