I do not support changing the definition of surgery to allow LVTs to suture gingival flaps.  LVTs are not formally trained in any form of surgery let alone oral surgery, and gingival flaps are not a surgical technique that is straight-forward or simple.  Think how much time is devoted in veterinary school to surgical training - surgery is not just placing sutures - it is assessing the viability of tissue, avoiding tension, and more importantly knowing what to do when things do not go according to plans.  Suturing within the closed tight space of an animal's mouth is technically challenging for vets many times, and it makes absolutely no sense to me to ammend the fairly clear cut definition of surgery (if cutting and suturing are not surgery, then what is?) for this particular procedure.  I see no benefit whatsoever of this proposed change to our patients.  Redefining the definition of surgery to fit whatever is economical or convenient it is a slippery slope that errodes the very clear distinction between doctor and support staff and compromises quality of care.  Would you want your own oral surgery performed by someone with unregulated and informal training?  If something goes wrong, the buck stops with the attending veterinarian's license, not the tech's.  Dentistry is an area of veterinary medicine where corners are already too commonly cut.  We should be working as a profession toward higher standards of care instead of lower, and should be valuing and utilizing our LVTs excellent educations to improve dental care appropriately.  When all patients undergoing dental procedures are getting full mouth radiographs, local blocks for extractions, intubation and excellent quality anesthesia, and multi-modal pain medication, then we can discuss finding more for our LVTs to do.