Journal of periodontology · 2010
Ten-year results after connective tissue grafts and guided tissue regeneration for root coverage.
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.
Nickles Katrin, Ratka-Krüger Petra, Neukranz Eric, Raetzke Peter, Eickholz Peter
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: This study clinically evaluates the 10-year results of connective tissue graft (CTG) and guided tissue regeneration (GTR) therapies using bioabsorbable barriers for root coverage (i.e., the reduction of recession depth).
METHODS: In 15 patients, 38 Miller Class I and II recessions were treated. Recession defects received a CTG or GTR by random assignment. At baseline (immediately prior to surgery) and 6 and 120 +/- 12 months after surgery, clinical parameters were obtained.
RESULTS: Nine patients, who contributed 24 recession defects, were available for re-examination at 120 +/- 12 months. Six and 120 +/- 12 months after receiving a CTG, statistically significant (P <0.05) root coverage was observed compared to baseline root coverage (6 months: 3.07 +/- 1.74 mm; 120 +/- 12 months: 2.07 +/- 1.89 mm). The GTR therapy resulted in statistically significant root coverage compared to baseline root coverage only after 6 months (2.28 +/- 1.77 mm; P <0.05). Both groups experienced a statistically significant loss of coverage from 6 to 120 +/- 12 months (CTG: -1.0 +/- 0.78 mm; GTR: -2.03 +/- 2.24 mm). At 120 +/- 12 months after CTG surgery, the stability of root coverage was statistically significantly better than 120 +/- 12 months after GTR surgery (P = 0.002). The CTG caused more post-surgical discomfort (P <0.05), but it resulted in a better treatment outcome (P <0.05) than GTR as perceived by patients.
CONCLUSION: The long-term stability of root coverage (i.e., the reduction of recession depth) and esthetic results perceived by patients were significantly better 10 years after CTG surgery, statistically, than after GTR surgery using bioabsorbable barriers.
METHODS: In 15 patients, 38 Miller Class I and II recessions were treated. Recession defects received a CTG or GTR by random assignment. At baseline (immediately prior to surgery) and 6 and 120 +/- 12 months after surgery, clinical parameters were obtained.
RESULTS: Nine patients, who contributed 24 recession defects, were available for re-examination at 120 +/- 12 months. Six and 120 +/- 12 months after receiving a CTG, statistically significant (P <0.05) root coverage was observed compared to baseline root coverage (6 months: 3.07 +/- 1.74 mm; 120 +/- 12 months: 2.07 +/- 1.89 mm). The GTR therapy resulted in statistically significant root coverage compared to baseline root coverage only after 6 months (2.28 +/- 1.77 mm; P <0.05). Both groups experienced a statistically significant loss of coverage from 6 to 120 +/- 12 months (CTG: -1.0 +/- 0.78 mm; GTR: -2.03 +/- 2.24 mm). At 120 +/- 12 months after CTG surgery, the stability of root coverage was statistically significantly better than 120 +/- 12 months after GTR surgery (P = 0.002). The CTG caused more post-surgical discomfort (P <0.05), but it resulted in a better treatment outcome (P <0.05) than GTR as perceived by patients.
CONCLUSION: The long-term stability of root coverage (i.e., the reduction of recession depth) and esthetic results perceived by patients were significantly better 10 years after CTG surgery, statistically, than after GTR surgery using bioabsorbable barriers.