Non-submerged de-epithelialized free gingival graft compared with conventional free gingival graft
Official title: Esthetic Evaluation of Non-Submerged De-Epithelialized Free Gingival Graft (Ns-dFGG) Versus Conventional Free Gingival Graft (cFGG) for the Augmentation of The Keratinized Mucosa: Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
Run by October University for Modern Sciences and Arts · NCT07174752 · Data updated 2026-11-12
This trial will see if a non-submerged de-epithelialized free gingival graft gives better esthetic results and increases keratinized tissue width and vestibular depth in adults with less than 2 mm of keratinized mucosa.
Quick facts
| Study type | Interventional |
|---|---|
| Ages | 18 Years and up |
| Sex | All |
| Enrollment | 30 (estimated) |
| Sponsor | October University for Modern Sciences and Arts Academic / other |
| Drugs / interventions | chemotherapy |
| Locations | 1 site (Giza) |
| Status | Recruiting |
| Started | December 29, 2024 |
| Main results expected | July 29, 2026 |
| Study ends | December 29, 2026 |
| Registry record updated | September 16, 2025 |
| Trial ID | NCT07174752 on ClinicalTrials.gov |
Is this trial a fit for you?
✓Likely a good fit
Adults 18–60 with insufficient keratinized mucosa (<2 mm) in the lower anterior area, good oral hygiene, and no contraindicating systemic conditions are ideal candidates.
✕Probably not a fit
Patients who smoke, have systemic conditions that impair healing, are receiving radiotherapy/chemotherapy, are pregnant, or already have adequate keratinized mucosa are unlikely to benefit from this procedure.
A plain-English reading of the study's rules. Only the study team can confirm whether you qualify.
What this trial studies
This randomized controlled trial compares a non-submerged de-epithelialized free gingival graft technique with the conventional free gingival graft in adults. Participants aged 18–60 with <2 mm keratinized mucosa in the lower anterior region and good oral hygiene will be randomized to one of the two surgical approaches. Key outcomes include change in keratinized tissue width, vestibular depth, and esthetic appearance measured over the post-operative follow-up period. Patients with systemic conditions affecting healing, smokers, those receiving radiotherapy/chemotherapy, and pregnant women are excluded.
Why it matters
Potential benefit: If successful, the non-submerged de-epithelialized technique could improve gum esthetics and increase keratinized tissue and vestibular depth compared with the conventional approach.
How similar studies have gone: Conventional free gingival grafting is an established gold standard, while de-epithelialized and non-submerged variants have shown promising but limited and variable evidence in prior studies.
Who can join: the full rules
Show full inclusion / exclusion criteria
Inclusion Criteria: * Adult patients: 18-60. * Insufficient width of keratinized mucosa, that is less than 2 mm. * Lower anterior areas. * Good oral hygiene. Exclusion Criteria: * Systemic conditions that prevent the patient from undergoing minor oral surgical procedures or hinder the healing process. * Patient undertaking radiotherapy or chemotherapy. * Smokers. * Pregnant females
Where it's running
-
October University for modern sciences and arts (MSA University)
Giza, Egypt Recruiting
Study contacts
- Study coordinator: Dalia Khorshed, Masters candidate
- Email: khorsheddalia12@gmail.com
- Phone: +201097486667
Similar studies
Other studies for the same condition or treatment. Recruiting studies are listed first.
-
Porous zirconia shell to widen the jawbone before implants
A small group of adults with a narrow lower back jaw will try a custom porous zirconia shell placed over bone grafts to see if it helps form good-quality new bone before placing dental implants.
-
Fixation of Free Gingival Graft with Tissue Tacks vs Criss-Cross Sutures
This study tests whether using tissue tacks to secure free gingival grafts is better, worse, or the same as criss-cross sutures in adults aged 18-40 with limited keratinized tissue.
-
BrightHearts biofeedback vs virtual reality vs verbal distraction for kids during a dental nerve block
This study tests whether BrightHearts biofeedback relaxation is as good as or better than virtual reality distraction or verbal distraction for reducing anxiety in children during an inferior alveolar nerve block.
-
Digital Caries Risk Questionnaire: does it match CAMBRA in Egyptian adults
A digital self‑administered caries risk questionnaire is being tested to see how well it matches the CAMBRA risk assessment in Egyptian adults who visit the dentist.
-
AI versus conventional digital design for dental crowns
This project will test whether an AI system can design dental crowns as accurately as conventional CAD software for adults (18–65) who need fixed dental prostheses.
-
ZOE versus Metapex with rotary or manual filing in children's primary molars
This test will compare Zinc Oxide Eugenol (ZOE) and Metapex, each used with rotary or manual filing, to see which helps infected baby molars heal better in children aged 5–8.
How to take part
- Review the eligibility criteria above with your treating physician.
- Check the official listing on ClinicalTrials.gov for the latest contact details and recruitment status.
- Contact the study coordinator or principal investigator to ask for pre-screening. Pre-screening is free and never obligates you to enroll.