Journal of periodontology · 2011
Treatment of gingival recession defects using coronally advanced flap with a porcine collagen matrix compared to coronally advanced flap with connective tissue graft: a randomized controlled clinical trial.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное 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.
Cardaropoli Daniele, Tamagnone Lorenzo, Roffredo Alessandro, Gaveglio Lorena
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Connective tissue graft (CTG) plus coronally advanced flap (CAF) is the reference therapy for root coverage. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the use of a porcine collagen matrix (PCM) plus CAF as an alternative to CTG+CAF for the treatment of gingival recessions (REC), in a prospective randomized, controlled clinical trial.
METHODS: Eighteen adult patients participated in this study. The patients presented 22 single Miller's Class I or II REC, randomly assigned to the test (PCM+CAF) or control (CTG+CAF) group. REC, probing depth, clinical attachment level (CAL), and width of keratinized tissue (KG) were evaluated at 12 months. In addition, the gingival thickness (GT) was measured 1mm apical to the bottom of the sulcus.
RESULTS: At 12 months, mean REC was 0.23 mm for test sites and 0.09 mm for control sites (P <0.01), whereas percentage of root coverage was 94.32% and 96.97%, respectively. CAL gain was 2.41 mm in test sites and 2.95 mm in control sites (P <0.01). KG gain was 1.23 mm in the test group and 1.27 mm in the control group (P <0.01). In test sites, GT changed from 0.82 to 1.82 mm, and in control sites, from 0.86 to 2.09 mm (P <0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of the study, both treatment procedures resulted in significant reduction in REC at 12 months. No statistically significant differences were found between PCM+CAF and CTG+CAF with regard to any clinical parameter. The collagen matrix represents a possible alternative to CTG.
METHODS: Eighteen adult patients participated in this study. The patients presented 22 single Miller's Class I or II REC, randomly assigned to the test (PCM+CAF) or control (CTG+CAF) group. REC, probing depth, clinical attachment level (CAL), and width of keratinized tissue (KG) were evaluated at 12 months. In addition, the gingival thickness (GT) was measured 1mm apical to the bottom of the sulcus.
RESULTS: At 12 months, mean REC was 0.23 mm for test sites and 0.09 mm for control sites (P <0.01), whereas percentage of root coverage was 94.32% and 96.97%, respectively. CAL gain was 2.41 mm in test sites and 2.95 mm in control sites (P <0.01). KG gain was 1.23 mm in the test group and 1.27 mm in the control group (P <0.01). In test sites, GT changed from 0.82 to 1.82 mm, and in control sites, from 0.86 to 2.09 mm (P <0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of the study, both treatment procedures resulted in significant reduction in REC at 12 months. No statistically significant differences were found between PCM+CAF and CTG+CAF with regard to any clinical parameter. The collagen matrix represents a possible alternative to CTG.