BACKGROUND: The palatal donor site of the free gingival graft (FGG) significantly influences the pain and discomfort experienced by the patient, and there is a potential for postoperative bleeding. The aim of this study was to compare the wound healing parameters with the use of a commercially available collagen dressing (CollaCote®) and platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) membrane as palatal bandage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty patients requiring FGG either for reduced/inadequate gingiva or gingival recession in the maxillary or mandibular anterior region were divided into two groups. In the first experimental group (10 patients), CollaCote® membrane was placed over the palatal wounds; conversely, the second experimental group patients were treated with a PRF membrane as palatal bandage. Clinical parameters recorded includes depth, immediate, and delayed bleeding, size of wound, pain, and tests for epithelialization which included hydrogen peroxide test and toluidine blue test at various time intervals. RESULTS: Intragroup comparisons showed significant improvement in wound healing parameters in both the groups. No statistically significant difference was found on intergroup comparison with respect to depth, hemorrhage, pain, epithelialization, and size, though the PRF group healed slightly better initially. CONCLUSION: Both CollaCote® and PRF palatal bandages significantly accelerate palatal wound healing and reduce the patient's pain and discomfort. PRF was easier to handle and suture and is also autogenous and economical as compared to CollaCote®.
BACKGROUND: The palatal donor site of the free gingival graft (FGG) significantly influences the pain and discomfort experienced by the patient, and there is a potential for postoperative bleeding. The aim of this study was to compare the wound healing parameters with the use of a commercially available collagen dressing (CollaCote®) and platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) membrane as palatal bandage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty patients requiring FGG either for reduced/inadequate gingiva or gingival recession in the maxillary or mandibular anterior region were divided into two groups. In the first experimental group (10 patients), CollaCote® membrane was placed over the palatal wounds; conversely, the second experimental group patients were treated with a PRF membrane as palatal bandage. Clinical parameters recorded includes depth, immediate, and delayed bleeding, size of wound, pain, and tests for epithelialization which included hydrogen peroxide test and toluidine blue test at various time intervals. RESULTS: Intragroup comparisons showed significant improvement in wound healing parameters in both the groups. No statistically significant difference was found on intergroup comparison with respect to depth, hemorrhage, pain, epithelialization, and size, though the PRF group healed slightly better initially. CONCLUSION: Both CollaCote® and PRF palatal bandages significantly accelerate palatal wound healing and reduce the patient's pain and discomfort. PRF was easier to handle and suture and is also autogenous and economical as compared to CollaCote®.