title: Comparative Evaluation of Gingival Depigmentation using Tetrafluoroethane Cryosurgery and Gingival Abrasion Technique: Two Years Follow Up.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  A comparative evaluation of the gingival depigmentation by using Tetrafluoroethane cryosurgery and the gingival abrasion technique - 2 years of follow up.
  
  
  METHODS
  Ten systemically healthy patients who were aged 18 to 36 years were selected for the study. Tetrafluoroethane was used for the cryosurgical depigmentation and the gingival abrasion technique used a coarse flame shaped bur. The presence or absence of pigmentation was tabulated, based on the GPI (Gingival Pigmentation Index). For the statistical analysis, Freidman's test was used.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The keratinization was completed within a week after the application of the cryogen and about 10 days after the gingival abrasion technique was done. The statistical analysis which was done after 90th, 180th days and 2 years. The p-value which was obtained (p<.001) showed the superiority of cryosurgery over the gingival abrasion. During the follow up period, no side effects were seen for both the techniques and the improved aesthetics was maintained upto 2 years.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The use of cryogen Tetrafluoroethane is easy, practical and inexpensive as compared to gingival abrasion, due to its high rate of recurrence. Hence, it is more acceptable to the patients and the operator. Further studies are needed to assess the long term effectiveness of the cryosurgical method of depigmentation.
authors.affiliation: Assistant Professor, Department of Periodontics, MCODS, Manipal University , Manipal-576104, India .
authors.forename: Santhosh
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Kumar
authors.forename: G Subraya
authors.initials: GS
authors.lastname: Bhat
authors.forename: K Mahalinga
authors.initials: KM
authors.lastname: Bhat
keywords: Aesthetics; Cryosurgery; Gingiva; Gingival abrasion; Melanin; Pigmentation; Tetrafluoroethane
references.citation: Lasers Surg Med. 2002;31(2):106-14
references.pmid: 12210594
references.citation: Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 1993;13(1):85-92
references.pmid: 8330948
references.citation: Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007 Apr;103(4):452-7
references.pmid: 17141535
references.citation: Quintessence Int. 1996 Aug;27(8):555-8
references.pmid: 9161259
references.citation: Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1998 Dec;86(6):660-3
references.pmid: 9868720
references.citation: Drug Metab Dispos. 1995 Aug;23(8):832-9
references.pmid: 7493550
references.citation: J Contemp Dent Pract. 2005 Aug 15;6(3):139-47
references.pmid: 16127483
references.citation: J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1993 Jul;51(7):759-61
references.pmid: 8509915
references.citation: Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1951 Aug;4(8):1012-6
references.pmid: 14863871
references.citation: Xenobiotica. 1993 Jul;23(7):719-29
references.pmid: 8237055
references.citation: J Periodontol. 1971 Jun;42(6):346-52
references.pmid: 5282575
references.citation: J Periodontol. 1985 Aug;56(8):488-91
references.pmid: 3869652
references.citation: Hum Exp Toxicol. 1996 Jun;15(6):508-17
references.pmid: 8793535
references.citation: Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2000 Aug;32(1):22-35
references.pmid: 11029265
references.citation: J Indian Dent Assoc. 1966 Jun;38(6):147-50 passim
references.pmid: 5223321
references.citation: Br Dent J. 1985 Mar 9;158(5):158
references.pmid: 3857062
references.citation: Hum Exp Toxicol. 1995 Sep;14(9):706-14
references.pmid: 8579880
references.citation: Br J Surg. 1967 Sep;54(9):770-6
references.pmid: 6047809
references.citation: J Clin Periodontol. 1987 Nov;14(10):614-7
references.pmid: 3480297
references.citation: J Periodontol. 2006 Apr;77(4):545-64
references.pmid: 16584335