Surgical Procedures Reducing Excessive Gingival Display in Gummy Smile Patients With Various Etiologic Backgrounds

Effectiveness of Different Modalities of Lip Repositioning Surgery for Management of Patients Complaining of Excessive Gingival Display: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Purpose

This study is aimed at synthesizing the available evidence regarding effectiveness of various modalities (combinations of LRS tasks) and comparison between each two modalities in terms of gingival display reduction, success rate, stability of the results, patient's satisfaction, and postoperative morbidity.

Materials and Methods

The electronic databases including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science Cochrane Library, Google Scholar databases, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO International Clinical Trial Registry Platform were searched up to 27th June 2020 regarding lip repositioning surgery. The modalities were defined as the combinations of the following tasks: frenectomy (yes/no), flap thickness (full/partial), and myotomy (yes/no). Meta-analyses were performed on gingival display change from baseline to months 3, 6, and 12 in each modalities using Stata (v.16).

Results

38 studies (including three clinical trials, two quasiexperimental studies, seven case series, and 26 case reports) met the criteria for final inclusion. The mean gingival display reduced from baseline to 6 months (WMD = -2.90, 95% CI: -4.85 to -0.95) in the patients undergoing the "frenectomy + full-thickness flap + myotomy" modality. This parameter decreased from baseline to 6 and 12 months, respectively (WMD = -2.68, 95% CI: -3.49 to -1.86; WMD = -2.52, 95% CI: -4.40 to -0.64), in patients undergoing the "frenectomy + partial-thickness flap + without myotomy" modality. In patients who undergone the "without frenectomy + partial-thickness flap + without myotomy" modality, gingival display reduced from baseline to 6 months (WMD = -3.22, 95% CI: -5.61 to -0.84). Almost 83% of patients with modality 1 had satisfaction.

Conclusions

Gingival display within the 6 months after LRS could be reduced with all modalities. Descriptively, the greatest reduction was observed in patients with the modality not including the frenulum.

Comparison of general and aesthetic effects between flapless and flap techniques in dental implantation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Information about the aesthetic effects of flapless in implant surgeries is scant. Differences of the survival rate (SR) and crestal bone loss (CBL) between the two techniques were also controversial. Thus, this review was aimed to compare the general and aesthetic effects of flapless and flap approaches in implant surgeries.

Materials and methods

Following the principals of PRISMA, literature databases were searched for the eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the clinical performances of flap and flapless techniques. After that, relevant data of selected studies were pooled and analyzed to compare SR, bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), visual analogue scale (VAS), papillae presentation index (PPI), keratinized mucosa (KM) width and CBL between the two techniques.

Results

Fourteen RCTs were included. No significant difference was found in SR (RR = − 0.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) (− 0.05, 0.04)), BOP (OR = 0.40, 95% CI (0.15, 1.02)), KM width (WMD = − 0.42, 95% CI (− 1.02, 0.17)) between two groups. Subgroup analysis revealed that the difference of CBL was insignificant in two groups (WMD = − 0.13, 95% CI (− 0.63, 0.38)). However, flap techniques would lead more peri-implant PD (WMD = − 0.37, 95% CI (− 0.51, − 0.23)). Subgroup analysis also indicated lower VAS scores in flapless group after 1 day (WMD = − 1.66, 95% CI (− 2.16, − 1.16)) but comparable pain experience after 3 days (WMD = − 0.59, 95% CI (− 1.33, 0.16)). Mean difference of PPI (WMD = 0.32, 95% CI (0.28, 0.35)) between the two groups was significant.

Conclusions

The flapless procedure showed a superiority in preserving gingival papillae, reducing postoperative pain and peri-implant PD compared to the flap procedure, while exhibiting comparable effects on SR, BOP, KW width changes and CBL. Flapless technique is more recommended at the ideal soft and hard tissue implanting sites.

The effect of botulinum toxin A in patients with excessive gingival display with and without zinc supplementation: randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

The objective is to determine the effect of oral zinc supplement intake on the clinical efficacy and sustained effect of BTXA injection, in patients with excessive gingival display (EGD).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-five participants with excessive gingival display (EGD) were included in this parallel-group RCT, treated with BTXA with and without Zinc supplementation prior to treatment. Participants were assessed for excessive gingival display reduction and results of stability at 2, 6, 12, 18, and 24 weeks. Patient satisfaction questionnaires were filled at 2, 12, and 24 weeks.

RESULTS

The results of this study revealed that after 6, 12, 18, as well as 24 weeks; The control group (BTXA) showed statistically significantly higher median gingival display than the intervention (Zinc supplement with BTXA). In the intervention group, the median gingival display after 24 weeks showed statistically significantly lower median value compared to the baseline measurement CONCLUSIONS: The use of zinc supplementation prior to BTXA injection prolonged its effect and maintained long-term decreased amount of gingival display, and it did not return to baseline measurements. Patients reported high satisfaction levels and self-confidence.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Botulinum Toxin A (BTXA) is used to correct gummy smile; however, its main drawback is its short-lasting effect. Oral zinc supplement intake prior to BTXA injection could maintain the effect of BTXA and enhance its clinical efficacy.

Surgical Correction of the "Gummy Smile"

The delineation of excessive gingival display and review of current treatment options. Discussion over periodontal and prosthetic treatments, mucosal stripping procedures, myotomies, Botox therapy, and orthognathic procedures for correction of the "gummy smile."