Advertisement

 

 

Connective tissue graft and tunnel or trapezoidal flap for the treatment of single maxillary gingival recessions: A randomized clinical trial.

Connective tissue graft and tunnel or trapezoidal flap for the treatment of single maxillary gingival recessions: A randomized clinical trial.
Author Information (click to view)

Santamaria MP, Neves FL, Silveira CA, Mathias IF, Fernandes-Dias SB, Jardini MA, Tatakis DN,


Santamaria MP, Neves FL, Silveira CA, Mathias IF, Fernandes-Dias SB, Jardini MA, Tatakis DN, (click to view)

Santamaria MP, Neves FL, Silveira CA, Mathias IF, Fernandes-Dias SB, Jardini MA, Tatakis DN,

Advertisement

Journal of clinical periodontology 2017 02 23() doi 10.1111/jcpe.12714
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Although ample evidence supports connective tissue graft (CTG) use for root coverage, there is need for research on recipient site preparation approaches. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of trapezoidal coronally advanced flap (CAF) and coronally advanced tunnel flap (TUN) when used in conjunction with CTG.

METHODS
Forty-two patients presenting 42 single maxillary, Miller Class I and II, gingival recession defects were randomly assigned to receive either CAF+CTG (N=21) or TUN+CTG (N=21). Clinical, patient-centred, and aesthetic outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS
Six months postoperatively, both groups resulted in significant reduction of recession depth and increases in keratinized tissue thickness and width. CAF+CTG and TUN+CTG mean root coverage was 87.2±27.1% and 77.4±20.4%, respectively (p=0.02). Complete root coverage was achieved in 71.4% and 28.6% of defects treated with CAF+CTG and TUN+CTG, respectively (p=0.01). At 7 days postoperatively, TUN+CTG patients reported significantly less pain experience (p=0.04). Both approaches reduced dentine hypersensitivity by approximately 85% (p<0.05). Patient-based aesthetic evaluation indicated significant improvement for both groups. Although patient- and professional-based aesthetic assessments revealed no differences between groups, tissue texture was significantly better for TUN+CTG (p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS
For root coverage of single maxillary recession defects, CAF+CTG was more effective than TUN+CTG (ClinicalTrial. org-NCT02814279). This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

one × three =

[ HIDE/SHOW ]