Gingival Recession
Conditions
Brief summary
Management of Miller class I & II gingival recession using coronally advanced flap combined with conventional de-epithelialized free gingival graft versus coronally advanced flap combined with abrasive de-epithelized connective tissue graft Null hypothesis: In patients with Miller class I and II gingival recession, there is no difference between coronally advanced flap with conventional de-epithelialized free gingival graft and coronally advanced flap with abrasive de-epithelized connective tissue graft in recession depth reduction.
Interventions
PROCEDUREcoronally advanced flap with abrasive de-epithelized graft.
SCTG will be harvested from the palate by abrasive de-epithelialization of palatal graft involves removing the epithelium of the selected area with a high-speed hand piece and diamond bur
PROCEDUREcoronally advanced flap with de-epithelized graft.
SCTG will be harvested from the palate by abrasive de-epithelialization of palatal graft involves removing the epithelium of the selected area with a blade
Sponsors
Halla Gamal Mohammed Esmail
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Age ≥ 18 years. * Systemically healthy patients. * Miller's Class I and II recession defects with recession depth ≥ 2mm. * Presence of identifiable cemento-enamel junction (CEJ). * Clinical indication and/or patient request for recession coverage. * Smoking ≤ 10 cigarettes/day. * Cooperative patients able and accept to come for follow up appointments.
Exclusion criteria
* Pregnant females. * Smoking ˃ 10 cigarettes/day. * Contraindication for periodontal surgery. * Patients with poor oral hygiene. * Recession defects associated with caries or restoration as well as * Teeth with evidence of a pulpal pathology * Molar teeth
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Direct Post-operative pain | 7 days | Directly will be evaluated post-surgically with Visual Analogue Scale with numbers from 0 to 10 that given to the patients at 7 days follow-up visits. |
| Indirect Post-operative pain | 7 days | Indirectly will be evaluated on the basis of the mean consumption of analgesics |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Gingival Recession Width | 6 months | measured at the level of the CEJ. |
| Width Of Keratinized Gingiva | 6 months | Measured from the gingival margin to the mucogingival line |
| Complete Root Coverage | 6 months | CRC evaluated in patients by single operator clinically using a periodontal probe. Root coverage was deemed complete when the gingival margin is at or above the level of CEJ |
| Gingival thickness | 6 months | It will be measured by penetrating the gingiva mid-buccally in the attached gingiva, half way between mucogingival junction and free gingival groove with the periodontal probe after giving local anesthesia to measure the thickness of gingival tissues. |
| Surgical chair time | at the time of surgery | measured by Stop watch |
| Root Coverage Esthetic Score | 6 months | The RES system evaluates five variables 6 months following surgery |
| Recession depth. | 6 months | Measured from the CEJ to the most apical extension of the gingival margin |
Outcome results
None listed