Comparison of two different techniques for deepithelialization: a split-mouth case series.

Aim: The aim of the present preliminary study was to observe and make a histologic comparison of connective tissue grafts (CTGs) harvested from the lateral palatal mucosa through the use of two different harvesting techniques.

Materials and methods: Three patients were enrolled in the study, providing six standardized CTGs. One well-experienced periodontist collected the replacement grafts using two different methods. After outlining the grafts to a fixed dimension, the graft on one side was deepithelialized by a round coarse bur intraorally before harvesting. The graft on the contralateral side was obtained by harvesting from the palate first; subsequently, deepithelialization was performed extraorally with the aid of a no. 15c blade. After finalization, histologic evaluation was performed.

Results: No apparent differences were found between the two observed techniques in terms of graft thickness, proportion, and composition. After deepithelialization, epithelial remnants were clearly evident in five out of six cases. Despite being more technique sensitive, the removal of epithelium by bur scored better. Proper graft handling and graft regularity are described as advantages of the more conventional epithelial excision by blade.

Conclusions: Despite the wide use and broad variety of commonly applied techniques of graft deepithelialization, the present authors assume that full excisions with the use of a blade are hardly ever achieved. Despite the unpredictable retrieval of epithelium by blade, graft handling and graft regularity can be proposed as the biggest advantages. On the other hand, the presented novel in situ deepithelialization with a round bur seems to be more predictable.