Gingival Recession
Conditions
Keywords
gingival recession, mucogingival surgery, collagen matrix, connective tissue graft, tunnel technique
Brief summary
The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of dental root coverage using the tunnel technique with connective tissue graft (CTG) and the same technique with collagen matrix for treatment of multiple gingival recessions Miller Class I and II. This study is a randomized-controlled clinical trial of 6 months duration.
Detailed description
According to the medical databases, there are limited randomized clinical trials comparing xenogenic collagen matrix and CTG used with the tunnel technique. The collagen matrix is a possible alternative to connective tissue graft. The purpose of this clinical study is to compare short-term (3-6 months) outcomes of a root coverage using the tunnel technique with the collagen matrix and the same technique with CTG for the treatment of multiple recessions Miller class I and II. Twenty eight patients are enrolled in the study. Patients in the test group are treated with xenogenic collagen matrix using the tunnel technique whereas patients in the control group with CTG. Clinical recordings are obtained at baseline and after 3 and 6 months. The percentage of average recession coverage (ARC) is evaluated after 3 and 6 months after the surgery.
Interventions
OTHERSurgery:The tunnel technique for covering gingival recession
The surgery starts with the sulcular incisions in the region of recessions, which enable access for the supraperiosteal preparation. The procedure is extended into the mucosal tissue using the tunneling knives. The partial-thickness flap is performed at the buccal site. Only the papillary regions are fully detached with the periosteum. The graft is placed into the tunnel and stabilized with absorbable sutures.The mobilized mucous flap is advanced coronally and stabilized with non-absorbable suspensory sutures.
Sponsors
Medical University of Silesia
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Investigator)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 60 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Presence of minimum two adjacent periodontal recessions Miller class I or II and at least 2 mm recessions depth.
Exclusion criteria
* Approximal Plaque Index (API) \> 15%, * Sulcus Bleeding Index (SBI) \> 10%, * Systemic diseases with compromised healing potential or infectious diseases, * Untreated periodontal conditions, * Pregnant and lactating females.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Clinical attachment level (CAL) | 6 months | Distance from the cemento enamel junction to the deepest point of the gingival sulcus |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Recession width (RW) | 6 months | Recession width horizontally at cemento-enamel junction level |
| Width of keratinized tissue (KTW) | 6 months | Distance from the mucogingival junction to the gingival margin |
| Recession area (RA) | 6 months | The area of a triangle with a width of recession as the base and a depth of the recession as the height. |
| Recession depth (RD) | 6 months | Distance from the mid-facial point of the cemento-enamel junction to the free gingival margin |
| The complete coverage of recessions (CRC) | 6 months | The percentage rate of patients with complete coverage of all recessions (CRC) |
| the average percentage of root coverage (ARC) | 6 months | The percentage of covered recession area. |
Other
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| The depth of gingival sulcus (PD) | 6 months | Distance from the gingival margin to the deepest point of gingival sulcus |
Countries
Poland
Outcome results
None listed