Comparing Laser and Scalpel for Soft Tissue Crown Lengthening: A Clinical Study


  •  Sana Farista    
  •  Butchibabu Kalakonda    
  •  Pradeep Koppolu    
  •  Kusai Baroudi    
  •  Esam Elkhatat    
  •  Essam Dhaifullah    

Abstract

Crown lengthening procedure is aimed at exposure of sufficient crown structure accomplished by a gingivectomy, an apically positioned flap with osseous resection or the use of lasers. Our present clinical study is aimed to assess the clinical effectiveness of a diode laser for functional crown lengthening procedure and to compare it with the conventional procedure using the scalpel. Fourteen patients including males and females, aged 20- 40 years were recruited and divided into two groups to undergo crown lengthening either with the scalpel or the laser. The data obtained was analyzed for intergroup comparison with an Unpaired t-test and intragroup comparison was determined by ANOVA.

Analysis of the intergroup results for pain showcased that there was a significant difference (P<0.002) in VAS scores of pain on the 3rd day as well as on the 7th day (P<0.044), with patients in the laser group displaying significantly lower VAS scores compared to the scalpel group, but when both the groups were compared on the 10th day, there was no significance (P<0.14).

Intergroup comparison of the mean VAS scores for discomfort observed on the 3rd, 7th and the 10th day of the study suggested that there was a significant difference of the VAS scores of discomfort on the 3rd and the7thdays, with the patients in the laser group displaying significantly lower VAS scores for discomfort compared with the scalpel.

Observations from the study emphasize that laser can be a safe and effective alternative to traditional crown lengthening performed with the scalpel.



This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
  • Issn(Print): 1916-9736
  • Issn(Onlne): 1916-9744
  • Started: 2009
  • Frequency: monthly

Journal Metrics

Google-based Impact Factor (2017): 1.84

h-index (June 2018): 32

i10-index (June 2018): 105

h5-index (June 2018): 23

h5-median(June 2018): 28

RG Journal impact: 1.26

Contact