The comparison of the efficacy of gingival unit graft with connective tissue graft in recession defect coverage: a randomized split-mouth clinical trial

被引:7
|
作者
Kayaalti-Yuksek, Sibel [1 ]
Yaprak, Emre [2 ]
机构
[1] Istanbul Okan Univ, Fac Dent, Dept Periodontol, Istanbul, Turkey
[2] Kocaeli Univ, Fac Dent, Dept Periodontol, Kocaeli, Turkey
关键词
Gingival recession; Recession defect coverage; Gingival unit; Subepithelial connective tissue graft; PERIODONTAL PLASTIC-SURGERY; CORONALLY ADVANCED FLAP; ROOT COVERAGE;
D O I
10.1007/s00784-021-04252-5
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objectives Gingival unit graft (GUG) is defined as the modified form of free gingival graft. The aim of this study is to compare the clinical efficacy of GUG with connective tissue graft (SCTG) with respect to clinical periodontal parameters and patient comfort scores in gingival recessions. Materials and methods Sixteen patients with bilateral recession type 1 (RT1) gingival recessions participated in this randomized and split-mouth study. Thirty-two defects received surgical treatment with SCTG or GUG. The recession defect coverage, periodontal measurements, and patient-reported outcomes (intra- and post-operative patient comfort, aesthetic satisfaction, and hypersensitivity) were evaluated at baseline and post-operative months 1, 3 and 6. Results The favorable results were obtained in both study groups in gingival recession depth (RD), gingival recession width (RW), clinical attachment level (CAL), and keratinized tissue width (KTW). The average percentages of the recession defect coverage (RC) for GUG and SCTG group treatments after 6 months were 68.2 +/- 33% and 76.4 +/- 30.2%, respectively (p > 0.05). Although there was no significant difference between groups at post-operative 6 months (p > 0.05) in terms of RD, RW, CAL, RC, patient comfort, aesthetic satisfaction, and hypersensitivity parameters, the increase in KTW was significantly higher in GUG group (p < 0.05). Conclusions It was concluded that although both techniques were effective, GUG can be a convenient method for treatment of RT1 gingival recessions with inadequate KTW and (or) shallow vestibule depth.
引用
收藏
页码:2761 / 2770
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Histologic and Clinical Study of Gingival Recession Treated with Subepithelial Connective Tissue Graft: A Case Report
    Garcia-De-la-Fuente, Ana-Maria
    Antonio Aguirre-Zorzano, Luis
    Estefania-Fresco, Ruth
    Roig-Odena, Laia
    Aguirre-Urizar, Jose-Manuel
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PERIODONTICS & RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY, 2017, 37 (01) : 89 - 97
  • [42] Comparison between connective tissue graft and xenogeneic acellular dermal matrix to treat single gingival recession: A data reanalysis of randomized clinical trials
    Viana Miguel, Manuela Maria
    Ferreira Ferraz, Lais Fernanda
    Rossato, Amanda
    Faria Cintra, Tuana Mendonca
    Mathias-Santamaria, Ingrid Fernandes
    Santamaria, Mauro Pedrine
    JOURNAL OF ESTHETIC AND RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY, 2022, 34 (08) : 1156 - 1165
  • [43] Splith mouth randomized control trial comparison of T-PRF and subepithelial connective tissue graft in the treatment of maxillar multiple gingival recessions
    Sen, Dilek Ozkan
    Oncu, Elif
    JOURNAL OF ESTHETIC AND RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY, 2023, 35 (03) : 449 - 456
  • [44] Complications in the Use of Deepithelialized Free Gingival Graft vs. Connective Tissue Graft: A One-Year Randomized Clinical Trial
    Ripoll, Silvestre
    Fernandez de Velasco-Tarilonte, Angela
    Bullon, Beatriz
    Rios-Carrasco, Blanca
    Fernandez-Palacin, Ana
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH, 2021, 18 (09)
  • [45] Effect of connective tissue graft orientation on root coverage and gingival augmentation
    Al-Zahrani, MS
    Bissada, NF
    Ficara, AJ
    Cole, B
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PERIODONTICS & RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY, 2004, 24 (01) : 65 - 69
  • [46] Effect of laser photobiomodulation on wound healing and postoperative pain following free gingival graft: A split-mouth triple-blind randomized controlled clinical trial
    Heidari, Mohadeseh
    Paknejad, Mojgan
    Jamali, Raika
    Nokhbatolfoghahaei, Hanieh
    Fekrazad, Reza
    Moslemi, Neda
    JOURNAL OF PHOTOCHEMISTRY AND PHOTOBIOLOGY B-BIOLOGY, 2017, 172 : 109 - 114
  • [47] Connective tissue graft versus bioresorbable membrane for gingival recession treatment.
    Glise, JM
    Borghetti, A
    Monnet-Corti, V
    Dejou, J
    JOURNAL OF DENTAL RESEARCH, 1998, 77 (05) : 1241 - 1241
  • [48] Subepithelial Connective Tissue Graft and Acellular Matrix Dermal in the treatment of gingival recession
    Grisi, DC
    Novaes, AB
    Grisi, MFM
    Souza, SL
    Molina, GO
    JOURNAL OF DENTAL RESEARCH, 2001, 80 (04) : 1083 - 1083
  • [49] Treatment of multiple adjacent RT 1 gingival recessions with the modified coronally advanced tunnel (MCAT) technique and a collagen matrix or palatal connective tissue graft: 9-year results of a split-mouth randomized clinical trial
    B. Molnár
    S. Aroca
    A. Dobos
    K. Orbán
    J. Szabó
    P. Windisch
    A. Stähli
    A. Sculean
    Clinical Oral Investigations, 2022, 26 : 7135 - 7142
  • [50] Autogenous dentin graft versus alloplastic graft combined with socket shield for pre-implant socket preservation: a split-mouth randomized clinical trial
    Abo-El-Saad, M. M.
    Melek, L. N. F.
    Fattah, H. S. Abdel
    Ayad, S. S.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2023, 52 (10) : 1090 - 1096