Soft tissue augmentation using de-epithelialized free gingival graft compared to single-line incision subepithelial connective tissue graft in the management of miller class I and II gingival recession: A randomized controlled clinical trial
Aims: The purpose of this randomized controlled clinical trial was to clinically assess soft tissue augmentation and compare patients' morbidity and root coverage outcomes of coronally advanced flap (CAF) with subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) versus de-epithelialized free gingival g...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
2022-01-01
|
| Series: | Contemporary Clinical Dentistry |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.contempclindent.org/article.asp?issn=0976-237X;year=2022;volume=13;issue=3;spage=227;epage=235;aulast=Mashaly |
| _version_ | 1828133651288686592 |
|---|---|
| author | Mohamed Mashaly Noha A Ghallab Weam Elbattawy Azza Ezz Elarab |
| author_facet | Mohamed Mashaly Noha A Ghallab Weam Elbattawy Azza Ezz Elarab |
| author_sort | Mohamed Mashaly |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Aims: The purpose of this randomized controlled clinical trial was to clinically assess soft tissue augmentation and compare patients' morbidity and root coverage outcomes of coronally advanced flap (CAF) with subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) versus de-epithelialized free gingival graft (DFGG) in the management of Miller Class I and II gingival recession. Materials and Methods: Twenty-eight patients with Miller's Class I or II gingival recession (GR) defects were randomly assigned into two equal parallel groups treated with either CAF + SCTG, harvested using single-line incision technique (control), or CAF + DFGG (test). Gingival thickness (GT), recession depth, recession width, percentage of root coverage, keratinized tissue width, pocket depth, and clinical attachment level were measured at baseline and 3 and 6 months postoperatively. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed postoperatively, including pain, stress, bleeding, and inability to chew. Patients' overall satisfaction and root coverage esthetic scores were recorded at 6 months. Results: Both groups demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in all clinical outcomes after 3 and 6 months compared to baseline. DFGG showed a statistically significant increase in GT after 6 months. No statistically significant difference was detected in other clinical outcomes between both groups at different time intervals. Both treatments achieved 92.9% complete root coverage. Patients treated with CAF + DFGG reported significantly higher stress and inability to chew scores after 2 weeks than those treated with SCTG. There were no significant differences in patient satisfaction between both groups. Conclusions: CAF + SCTG and CAF + DFGG were both effective and can be applied safely in treating Miller Class I and II GRs. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-11T17:22:27Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-7dd53e0c9d7d482681a2114c9df60a1a |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 0976-237X 0976-2361 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-11T17:22:27Z |
| publishDate | 2022-01-01 |
| publisher | Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Contemporary Clinical Dentistry |
| spelling | doaj.art-7dd53e0c9d7d482681a2114c9df60a1a2022-12-22T04:12:28ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsContemporary Clinical Dentistry0976-237X0976-23612022-01-0113322723510.4103/ccd.ccd_763_20Soft tissue augmentation using de-epithelialized free gingival graft compared to single-line incision subepithelial connective tissue graft in the management of miller class I and II gingival recession: A randomized controlled clinical trialMohamed MashalyNoha A GhallabWeam ElbattawyAzza Ezz ElarabAims: The purpose of this randomized controlled clinical trial was to clinically assess soft tissue augmentation and compare patients' morbidity and root coverage outcomes of coronally advanced flap (CAF) with subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) versus de-epithelialized free gingival graft (DFGG) in the management of Miller Class I and II gingival recession. Materials and Methods: Twenty-eight patients with Miller's Class I or II gingival recession (GR) defects were randomly assigned into two equal parallel groups treated with either CAF + SCTG, harvested using single-line incision technique (control), or CAF + DFGG (test). Gingival thickness (GT), recession depth, recession width, percentage of root coverage, keratinized tissue width, pocket depth, and clinical attachment level were measured at baseline and 3 and 6 months postoperatively. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed postoperatively, including pain, stress, bleeding, and inability to chew. Patients' overall satisfaction and root coverage esthetic scores were recorded at 6 months. Results: Both groups demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in all clinical outcomes after 3 and 6 months compared to baseline. DFGG showed a statistically significant increase in GT after 6 months. No statistically significant difference was detected in other clinical outcomes between both groups at different time intervals. Both treatments achieved 92.9% complete root coverage. Patients treated with CAF + DFGG reported significantly higher stress and inability to chew scores after 2 weeks than those treated with SCTG. There were no significant differences in patient satisfaction between both groups. Conclusions: CAF + SCTG and CAF + DFGG were both effective and can be applied safely in treating Miller Class I and II GRs.http://www.contempclindent.org/article.asp?issn=0976-237X;year=2022;volume=13;issue=3;spage=227;epage=235;aulast=Mashalyconnective tissue graft(s)gingival recessiongingival thicknessmucogingival surgeryplastic periodontal surgery |
| spellingShingle | Mohamed Mashaly Noha A Ghallab Weam Elbattawy Azza Ezz Elarab Soft tissue augmentation using de-epithelialized free gingival graft compared to single-line incision subepithelial connective tissue graft in the management of miller class I and II gingival recession: A randomized controlled clinical trial Contemporary Clinical Dentistry connective tissue graft(s) gingival recession gingival thickness mucogingival surgery plastic periodontal surgery |
| title | Soft tissue augmentation using de-epithelialized free gingival graft compared to single-line incision subepithelial connective tissue graft in the management of miller class I and II gingival recession: A randomized controlled clinical trial |
| title_full | Soft tissue augmentation using de-epithelialized free gingival graft compared to single-line incision subepithelial connective tissue graft in the management of miller class I and II gingival recession: A randomized controlled clinical trial |
| title_fullStr | Soft tissue augmentation using de-epithelialized free gingival graft compared to single-line incision subepithelial connective tissue graft in the management of miller class I and II gingival recession: A randomized controlled clinical trial |
| title_full_unstemmed | Soft tissue augmentation using de-epithelialized free gingival graft compared to single-line incision subepithelial connective tissue graft in the management of miller class I and II gingival recession: A randomized controlled clinical trial |
| title_short | Soft tissue augmentation using de-epithelialized free gingival graft compared to single-line incision subepithelial connective tissue graft in the management of miller class I and II gingival recession: A randomized controlled clinical trial |
| title_sort | soft tissue augmentation using de epithelialized free gingival graft compared to single line incision subepithelial connective tissue graft in the management of miller class i and ii gingival recession a randomized controlled clinical trial |
| topic | connective tissue graft(s) gingival recession gingival thickness mucogingival surgery plastic periodontal surgery |
| url | http://www.contempclindent.org/article.asp?issn=0976-237X;year=2022;volume=13;issue=3;spage=227;epage=235;aulast=Mashaly |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT mohamedmashaly softtissueaugmentationusingdeepithelializedfreegingivalgraftcomparedtosinglelineincisionsubepithelialconnectivetissuegraftinthemanagementofmillerclassiandiigingivalrecessionarandomizedcontrolledclinicaltrial AT nohaaghallab softtissueaugmentationusingdeepithelializedfreegingivalgraftcomparedtosinglelineincisionsubepithelialconnectivetissuegraftinthemanagementofmillerclassiandiigingivalrecessionarandomizedcontrolledclinicaltrial AT weamelbattawy softtissueaugmentationusingdeepithelializedfreegingivalgraftcomparedtosinglelineincisionsubepithelialconnectivetissuegraftinthemanagementofmillerclassiandiigingivalrecessionarandomizedcontrolledclinicaltrial AT azzaezzelarab softtissueaugmentationusingdeepithelializedfreegingivalgraftcomparedtosinglelineincisionsubepithelialconnectivetissuegraftinthemanagementofmillerclassiandiigingivalrecessionarandomizedcontrolledclinicaltrial |