Comparison between micro- and macrosurgical techniques for the treatment of localized gingival recessions using coronally positioned flaps and enamel matrix derivative.

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to compare the macro- and microsurgery techniques for root coverage using a coronally positioned flap (CPF) associated with enamel matrix derivative (EMD).

METHODS

Thirty patients were selected for the treatment of localized gingival recessions (GRs) using CPF associated to EMD. Fifteen patients were randomly assigned to the test group (TG), and 15 patients were randomly assigned to the control group (CG). The microsurgical approach was performed in the TG, and the conventional macrosurgical technique was performed in the CG. The clinical parameters evaluated before surgery and after 6 months were GR, probing depth, relative clinical attachment level, width of keratinized tissue (WKT), and thickness of keratinized tissue (TKT). The discomfort evaluation was performed 1 week postoperative.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences between groups for all parameters at baseline. At 6 months, there was no statistically significant difference between the techniques in achieving root coverage. The percentage of root coverage was 92% and 83% for TG and CG, respectively. After 6 months, there was a statistically significant increase of WKT and TKT in TG only. Both procedures were well tolerated by all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The macro- and microsurgery techniques provided a statistically significant reduction in GR height. After 6 months, there was no statistically significant difference between the techniques regarding root coverage, and the microsurgical technique demonstrated a statistically significant increase in WKT and TKT.