IRCT20230102057017N1 IRCT 2023-01-30 Tehran University of Medical Sciences Comparison of 2 methods of gingival connective tissue grafting in terms of patient comfort and grafted tissue quality Comparison morbidity in donor site and color matching in recipient site between two different free connective tissue graft harvesting technique from palate 2023-01-16 anticipated 12 Complete https://irct.ir/trial/68042 interventional Randomization: Randomized, Blinding: Single blinded, Placebo: Not used, Assignment: Parallel, Purpose: Treatment, Other design features: This study will be conducted as a split mouth randomized controlled clinical trial. The surgical technique in the control group was the trap door method and in the test group, the preparation method was epithelialization and then de-epithelialization outside the mouth, Randomization description: In this study, the donor and recipient areas are both on the same side. To determine the direction and type of surgery, trap door-left, trap door-right, deepithelization-right and deepithelization-left are written in 4 envelopes. On the day of the surgery and just before the surgery, one of the envelopes is removed to determine the direction and type of surgery for the first session. About 4 to 2 weeks later (depending on the extent of recovery and improvement of the patient's pain symptoms), another surgical procedure will be performed on the opposite side, Blinding description: The patient and the evaluators in the 6-month follow-up are unaware of the surgical method used in each side. Only the researcher who performs the surgeries herself is aware of the method used in each direction. N/A Gingival recession. Intervention group: The group in which graft harvested from the palate in an epithelialized form. Undecided - It is not yet known if there will be a plan to make this available Justification or reason for indecision in sharing IPD is There is no further information