Journal of clinical periodontology · 2020
Tunnel technique with connective tissue graft versus coronally advanced flap with enamel matrix derivate for root coverage: 2-year results of an RCT using 3D digital measuring for volumetric comparison of gingival dimensions.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zuhr Otto, Rebele Stephan F, Vach Kirstin, Petsos Hari, Hürzeler Markus B, Research Group for Oral Soft Tissue Biology & Wound Healing
Аннотация
AIM: The aim of this randomized clinical trial was to compare clinical and volumetric outcomes of tunnel technique (TUN) with subepithelial connective tissue graft (CTG) versus coronally advanced flap (CAF) with enamel matrix derivate (EMD) 2 years after gingival recession (GR) treatment.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-three patients contributed 45 Miller class I or II GR. At baseline and follow-up examinations, study models were collected. Their three-dimensional scans allowed precise computer-assisted measurement of recession depth (REC), complete root coverage (CRC), percentage of root coverage (RC), pointwise (pTHK) and mean areal (aTHK) marginal soft tissue thickness. Clinical examination delivered probing depths (PPD) and height of keratinized tissue.
RESULTS: 24 months after surgery, digitally evaluated CRC was present in 60.0% of the TUN + CTG and 0.0% of the CAF + EMD-treated sites (p < .0001), meaning a certain relapse of the gingival margin ragarding both approaches. RC amounted to 94.0% (TUN + CTG) and 57.3% (CAF + EMD), respectively (p < .0001). REC reduction (RECred) was significantly higher for TUN + CTG (1.81 ± 0.56 mm) than for CAF + EMD (0.90 ± 0.45 mm) (p < .0001). pTHK and aTHK values were significantly greater in the TUN + CTG group (1.41 ± 0.35 mm and 1.11 ± 0.26 mm) than in the CAF + EMD group (0.78 ± 0.32 mm and 0.60 ± 0.26 mm) (p < .0001). Statistical analysis detected positive correlations between THK and both RC and RECred (p < .001).
CONCLUSIONS: Two years post-operatively, CTG showed better clinical and volumetric outcomes than EMD. Increased THK values were associated with improved outcomes regarding RC and RECred.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-three patients contributed 45 Miller class I or II GR. At baseline and follow-up examinations, study models were collected. Their three-dimensional scans allowed precise computer-assisted measurement of recession depth (REC), complete root coverage (CRC), percentage of root coverage (RC), pointwise (pTHK) and mean areal (aTHK) marginal soft tissue thickness. Clinical examination delivered probing depths (PPD) and height of keratinized tissue.
RESULTS: 24 months after surgery, digitally evaluated CRC was present in 60.0% of the TUN + CTG and 0.0% of the CAF + EMD-treated sites (p < .0001), meaning a certain relapse of the gingival margin ragarding both approaches. RC amounted to 94.0% (TUN + CTG) and 57.3% (CAF + EMD), respectively (p < .0001). REC reduction (RECred) was significantly higher for TUN + CTG (1.81 ± 0.56 mm) than for CAF + EMD (0.90 ± 0.45 mm) (p < .0001). pTHK and aTHK values were significantly greater in the TUN + CTG group (1.41 ± 0.35 mm and 1.11 ± 0.26 mm) than in the CAF + EMD group (0.78 ± 0.32 mm and 0.60 ± 0.26 mm) (p < .0001). Statistical analysis detected positive correlations between THK and both RC and RECred (p < .001).
CONCLUSIONS: Two years post-operatively, CTG showed better clinical and volumetric outcomes than EMD. Increased THK values were associated with improved outcomes regarding RC and RECred.