Purpose: The aim of the present study was to compare the influence of 2 mucoperiosteal flaps, marginal and paramarginal, on the periodontal healing of adjacent maxillary teeth after extraction of palatally impacted canines.
Patients and methods: Marginal (15 patients) and paramarginal (16 patients) techniques were used to remove palatally impacted canines. The periodontal examination of the adjacent teeth included evaluation of the plaque index, gingival index, probing depth, and clinical crown length preoperatively and at the first, third, and sixth months postoperatively using an individual acrylic stent.
Results: No significant differences between the marginal and paramarginal flaps were found with respect to plaque index, gingival index, labial and palatal probing depth, and labial and palatal clinical crown length at all follow-up points.
Conclusion: The results of our study have shown that the paramarginal flap design is a good alternative to the marginal flap design.