Patient perceptions and clinical efficacy of labial frenectomies using diode laser versus conventional techniques

INTRODUCTION

The aim of present study was to compare the keratinized gingival tissue measurements, degree of subjective complaints and functional complications of using an 980nm diode laser versus a scalpel for labial frenectomies.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Thirty-six patients requiring labial frenectomies, between 14 and 51 years old, were randomly assigned to either scalpel or diode laser treatments. The soft tissue measurements, including the keratinized gingiva width (KGW), attached gingiva width (AGW) and attached gingiva thickness (AGT), were recorded before surgery, immediately after, one week later and one, three and six months after surgery. In addition, the functional complications and the morbidity (level of pain, swelling and redness) were evaluated during the first postoperative week using a visual analog scale (VAS).

RESULTS

We determined statistically significant gains in the KGW, AGW and AGT after surgery in both groups; however, there was no significant difference between the study groups. The VAS scores indicated that the patients treated with a diode laser had less discomfort and functional complications compare with scalpel surgery.

DISCUSSION

The results described above show that diode laser surgery offers a safe, impressive alternative for labial frenectomies that are comfortable for the patients.

Clinical evaluation and marginal leakage of Amalgambond Plus: three-year results

Amalgambond Plus with a high-performance additive was evaluated for its ability to bond a resin composite or an amalgam alloy to deep dentin in primary teeth with nonretentive cavity preparations. The clinical performance of amalgam and resin composite mesio-occlusodistal restorations bonded with Amalgambond Plus was evaluated at 15 months and 2 and 3 years. There was no statistically significant difference in the retention, marginal adaptation, secondary caries, and post-operative sensitivity over the times of the evaluation or between amalgam and resin composite restorations. After 3 years, most of the teeth were extracted because it was their exfoliation time, and 29 restorations limited within buccal and lingual cusps were evaluated for marginal leakage. There were no significant differences in microleakage between amalgam and resin composite restorations lined with Amalgambond Plus. Amalgambond Plus has the potential for serving successfully as a cavity liner with either amalgam or resin composite restorations.