Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2014
Clinical evaluation of subepithelial connective tissue graft and guided tissue regeneration for treatment of Miller's class 1 gingival recession (comparative, split mouth, six months study).
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Trivedi Sakshee-R, Bhavsar Neeta-V, Dulani Kirti, Trivedi Rahul
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The present study aims to clinically compare and evaluate subepithelial connective tissue graft and the GTR based root coverage in treatment of Miller's Class I gingival recession.
STUDY DESIGN: 30 patients with at least one pair of Miller's Class I gingival recession were treated either with Subepithelial connective tissue graft (Group A) or Guided tissue regeneration (Group B). Clinical parameters monitored included recession RD, width of keratinized gingiva (KG), probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), attached gingiva (AG), residual probing depth (RPD) and % of Root coverage(%RC). Measurements were taken at baseline, three months and six months. A standard surgical procedure was used for both Group A and Group B. Data were recorded and statistical analysis was done for both intergroup and intragroup.
RESULTS: At end of six months % RC obtained were 84.47% (Group A) and 81.67% (Group B). Both treatments resulted in statistically significant improvement in clinical parameters. When compared, no statistically significant difference was found between both groups except in RPD, where it was significantly greater in Group A.
CONCLUSIONS: GTR technique has advantages over subepithelial connective tissue graft for shallow Miller's Class I defects and this procedure can be used to avoid patient discomfort and reduce treatment time. Key words:Collagen membrane, comparative split mouth study, gingival recession, subepithelial connective tissue graft, guided tissue regeneration (GTR).
STUDY DESIGN: 30 patients with at least one pair of Miller's Class I gingival recession were treated either with Subepithelial connective tissue graft (Group A) or Guided tissue regeneration (Group B). Clinical parameters monitored included recession RD, width of keratinized gingiva (KG), probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), attached gingiva (AG), residual probing depth (RPD) and % of Root coverage(%RC). Measurements were taken at baseline, three months and six months. A standard surgical procedure was used for both Group A and Group B. Data were recorded and statistical analysis was done for both intergroup and intragroup.
RESULTS: At end of six months % RC obtained were 84.47% (Group A) and 81.67% (Group B). Both treatments resulted in statistically significant improvement in clinical parameters. When compared, no statistically significant difference was found between both groups except in RPD, where it was significantly greater in Group A.
CONCLUSIONS: GTR technique has advantages over subepithelial connective tissue graft for shallow Miller's Class I defects and this procedure can be used to avoid patient discomfort and reduce treatment time. Key words:Collagen membrane, comparative split mouth study, gingival recession, subepithelial connective tissue graft, guided tissue regeneration (GTR).