Gum graft showdown: scalpel vs radiofrequency – which works better?

NCT ID NCT07521566

Ongoing Disease control Sponsor: Dokuz Eylul University Source: ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

First seen Jun 26, 2026 · Last updated Jun 27, 2026 · Updated 1 time

Summary

This study tested two methods for preparing gum grafts to treat receding gums. One method uses a scalpel outside the mouth, the other uses a radiofrequency device inside the mouth. Forty-eight patients received one of these grafts along with a surgical gum lift. Researchers checked how much gum tissue grew back and how much leftover tissue remained in the graft, aiming to find a simpler, more comfortable technique.

What this could mean

Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only — not medical advice or a prediction.

Active substance: de-epithelialized connective tissue graft
What this could lead to: If successful, this could identify a better, more reliable way to prepare gum grafts, leading to more complete gum coverage and less discomfort for patients.
What could go wrong: This is a small, early-stage study with only 48 participants. The results may not apply to all patients, and neither method may prove clearly superior.

This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.

Get updates

Get notified about this study

Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for GINGIVAL RECESSION, MUCOGINGIVAL SURGERY are added.

Our safety recommendation!

By submitting, you agree to our Terms of use

Conditions

The condition(s) this trial relates to.

gingival recession

As listed by the trial registrant

The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.

GINGIVAL RECESSION, MUCOGINGIVAL SURGERY GINGIVAL RECESSIONS

Contacts and locations

Locations

Dokuz Eylul University

Izmir, Turkey (Türkiye)

More trials for these conditions

Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.