Journal of clinical periodontology · 2018
Treatment of single maxillary gingival recession associated with non-carious cervical lesion: Randomized clinical trial comparing connective tissue graft alone to graft plus partial restoration.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Santamaria Mauro Pedrine, Silveira Camila Augusto, Mathias Ingrid Fernandes, Neves Felipe Lucas da Silva, Dos Santos Lúcio Murilo, Jardini Maria Aparecida Neves, Tatakis Dimitris N, Sallum Enilson Antônio, Bresciani Eduardo
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Gingival recession (GR) is frequently associated with non-carious cervical lesion (NCCL) forming a combined defect (CD). The aim of this study was to evaluate a new multidisciplinary protocol for CDs.
METHODS: Forty patients presenting 40 Miller's Class I or II GR defects associated with B+ tooth cervical defect were randomly allocated to one of the following treatments: test group (n = 20), partial restoration (PR) of the NCCL, in which the apical border of the restoration was placed 1 mm beyond the cement-enamel junction estimation, and connective tissue graft (CTG + PR) and Control Group (n = 20), odontoplasty of the NCCL and connective tissue graft (CTG). Clinical, aesthetic and patient-centred outcomes were evaluated.
RESULTS: After 12 months, CD coverage rates were 75.3% (2.5 ± 1.0 mm) for CTG + PR and 74.6% (2.4 ± 1.1 mm) for CTG (p > 0.05). The estimated complete root coverage was 60% (n = 12) for CTG + PR and 70% (n = 14) for CTG. CTG + PR resulted in significantly better dentin hypersensitivity (DH) reduction (p = 0.034). Both groups resulted in aesthetic improvements; however, the CTG + PR group showed better gingival contour results.
CONCLUSIONS: CTG and CTG + PR were effective to treat CD. Use of PR resulted in better gingival margin contour and DH reduction, without effect on CD coverage by CTG. (NCT02817763).
METHODS: Forty patients presenting 40 Miller's Class I or II GR defects associated with B+ tooth cervical defect were randomly allocated to one of the following treatments: test group (n = 20), partial restoration (PR) of the NCCL, in which the apical border of the restoration was placed 1 mm beyond the cement-enamel junction estimation, and connective tissue graft (CTG + PR) and Control Group (n = 20), odontoplasty of the NCCL and connective tissue graft (CTG). Clinical, aesthetic and patient-centred outcomes were evaluated.
RESULTS: After 12 months, CD coverage rates were 75.3% (2.5 ± 1.0 mm) for CTG + PR and 74.6% (2.4 ± 1.1 mm) for CTG (p > 0.05). The estimated complete root coverage was 60% (n = 12) for CTG + PR and 70% (n = 14) for CTG. CTG + PR resulted in significantly better dentin hypersensitivity (DH) reduction (p = 0.034). Both groups resulted in aesthetic improvements; however, the CTG + PR group showed better gingival contour results.
CONCLUSIONS: CTG and CTG + PR were effective to treat CD. Use of PR resulted in better gingival margin contour and DH reduction, without effect on CD coverage by CTG. (NCT02817763).