Table 4.
Retrospective review of studies on flap design comparison.
| Author/Year | Flap design compared | Sample size | Parameters | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stephen J.R et al. (1983)24 | A. Envelope flap B. Modification of the envelope flap |
15 | Periodontal pocket depth | Not significant |
| Krik D.G. et al. (2007)25 | A. Buccal envelope flap B. Modified triangular flap |
32 | Pain, mouth opening, swelling, incidence of alveolar ostietis | Not significant |
| Chin Quee T.A et al. (1984)3 | A. Envelope flap B. Vertical flap |
30 | Alveolar bone height and Periodontal pocket depth | Not significant |
| Rosa et al. (2002)9 | A. 3 cornered flap B. Szmyd flap |
14 | Probing depth and Clinical attachment level | Not significant |
| Nageshwar et al. (2002)17 | A. Distolingually based flap by Buccal comma shaped incision B. Conventional modified envelope incision |
50 | Pain, swelling, trismus, periodontal status | Buccal comma shaped incision shows parametric significance. |
| Saurez et al. (2003)16 | A. Para marginal flap B. Marginal flap |
27 | Wound healing, periodontal pocket depth, pain, swelling, trismus | Not significant |
| Erdogan Ö et al. (2011)13 | A. Envelope flap B. Triangular flap |
20 | Pain, mouth opening, facial swelling | Not significant |
| Silva et al. (2011)18 | A. Vertical incision [technique A] B. L-shaped flap [technique B] |
24 | Periodontal probing depth. | No statistically significant difference in flap design. The alternative flap technique (technique A) better wound healing. |
| Briguglio et al. (2011)19 | A. Envelope flap modified [Thibauld and parant] B. Laskin triangular flap C. Envelope flap modified [Laskin] |
45 | Periodontal health, Clinical attachment | Statistical significance in reduction of pocket probing depth and increase of clinical attachment level in group B compared to the other groups. |
| Koyuncu et al. (2013)12 | A. Envelope flap B. Modified triangular flap |
80 | Incidence of alveolar osteitis, Postoperative pain, swelling, | The envelope flap design was associated with a higher incidence of AO that was not statistically significant. Second day postoperative pain and swelling was observed as significantly different with the envelope flap technique. |
| Desai et al. (2014)10 | 30 | visibility, accessibility, excessive bleeding during surgery, healing of flap, sensitivity of adjacent teeth, and dry socket | No statistical differences were noted between the groups in terms of visibility, accessibility, excessive bleeding during surgery, healing of flap, sensitivity of adjacent teeth, and dry socket. A statistically significant difference was observed in postoperative hematoma, wound gaping, and distal pocket in adjacent tooth, which was significant in Ward's triangular incision. |