Treatment of Multiple Adjacent Gingival Recessions with a Coronally Advanced Flap vs a Modified Coronally Advanced Tunnel with a Volumetrically Stable Collagen Matrix: A 12-Month Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Giovanna Laura Di Domenico, Davide Guglielmi, Sofia Aroca, Massimo de Sanctis
{"title":"Treatment of Multiple Adjacent Gingival Recessions with a Coronally Advanced Flap vs a Modified Coronally Advanced Tunnel with a Volumetrically Stable Collagen Matrix: A 12-Month Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.","authors":"Giovanna Laura Di Domenico, Davide Guglielmi, Sofia Aroca, Massimo de Sanctis","doi":"10.11607/prd.6796","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The introduction of a new collagen substitute, which will potentially reduce the invasiveness of techniques by avoiding the need for a second surgical site (ie, the donor site), needs to be evaluated in relation to the surgical procedure that could benefit the most by utilizing such a matrix. This study compared the clinical outcomes following treatment of RT1 multiple adjacent gingival recessions (MAGRs) using the modified coronally advanced tunnel (MCAT) technique or the multiple coro- nally advanced flap (MCAF) in conjunction with a new volume-stable xenogeneic collagen matrix (VXCM). Secondarily, the study evaluated whether patients report a preference between the two surgical techniques in terms of discomfort. A total of 20 patients requiring treatment of MAGRs were randomly assigned to one of the two treatment groups: MCAF&#43;VCMX (Group A) or MCAT&#43;VCMX (Group B). The following measurements were recorded at baseline (before surgery) and at 6 and 12 months: gingival recession depth (REC), probing pocket depth (PD), keratinized tissue width (KTW), and gingival thickness (GT). Postoperative pain and discomfort were recorded using a visual analog scale (VAS) at 1 week. The primary outcome variable was mean root coverage (mRC), and second- ary outcomes were complete root coverage (CRC), changes in KTW and GT, patient discomfort and satisfaction, and duration of surgery. Healing was uneventful in both groups. At 12 months, both treatments resulted in statistically significant improvements in REC and GT compared to baseline (P < .05). The mRC was 79.95% ± 29.92% in the MCAF group and 64.74% ± 40.5% in the MCAT group (P &#61; .124). CRC was seen in 65.6% of MCAF-treated sites and 52% of MCAT-treated sites (P &#61; .181). Similar clinical results should be expected when MAGRs are treated with MCAF or MCAT, with the adjunct of VCMX.</p>","PeriodicalId":54948,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/prd.6796","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The introduction of a new collagen substitute, which will potentially reduce the invasiveness of techniques by avoiding the need for a second surgical site (ie, the donor site), needs to be evaluated in relation to the surgical procedure that could benefit the most by utilizing such a matrix. This study compared the clinical outcomes following treatment of RT1 multiple adjacent gingival recessions (MAGRs) using the modified coronally advanced tunnel (MCAT) technique or the multiple coro- nally advanced flap (MCAF) in conjunction with a new volume-stable xenogeneic collagen matrix (VXCM). Secondarily, the study evaluated whether patients report a preference between the two surgical techniques in terms of discomfort. A total of 20 patients requiring treatment of MAGRs were randomly assigned to one of the two treatment groups: MCAF+VCMX (Group A) or MCAT+VCMX (Group B). The following measurements were recorded at baseline (before surgery) and at 6 and 12 months: gingival recession depth (REC), probing pocket depth (PD), keratinized tissue width (KTW), and gingival thickness (GT). Postoperative pain and discomfort were recorded using a visual analog scale (VAS) at 1 week. The primary outcome variable was mean root coverage (mRC), and second- ary outcomes were complete root coverage (CRC), changes in KTW and GT, patient discomfort and satisfaction, and duration of surgery. Healing was uneventful in both groups. At 12 months, both treatments resulted in statistically significant improvements in REC and GT compared to baseline (P < .05). The mRC was 79.95% ± 29.92% in the MCAF group and 64.74% ± 40.5% in the MCAT group (P = .124). CRC was seen in 65.6% of MCAF-treated sites and 52% of MCAT-treated sites (P = .181). Similar clinical results should be expected when MAGRs are treated with MCAF or MCAT, with the adjunct of VCMX.

使用冠状前移皮瓣与使用体积稳定的胶原基质的改良冠状前移隧道治疗多个邻近牙龈凹陷:一项为期 12 个月的随机对照临床试验。
目的:引入一种新的胶原替代物,通过避免第二个手术部位(即供体部位)的需要,有可能降低这两种技术的侵入性。本研究的目的是比较使用改良冠状前移隧道技术(MCAT)或多冠状前移皮瓣(MCAF)结合新的体积稳定异种胶原基质(VXCM)治疗 RT 1 多邻面牙龈凹陷(MAGRs)后的临床效果。其次,该研究还评估了患者是否对两种手术技术的不适感有所偏好:20 名需要治疗 MAGRs 的患者被随机分配到两个治疗组中的一组(A 组:MCAF+VCMX;B 组:MCAT+VCMX)。在基线(即手术前)、6 个月和 12 个月时记录以下测量值:牙龈退缩深度 (REC)、探诊袋深度 (PPD)、角质化组织宽度 (KTW) 和牙龈厚度 (GT)。术后 1 周的疼痛和不适用视觉模拟量表(VAS)进行记录。主要结果变量是平均牙根覆盖率(mRC),次要结果是完全牙根覆盖率(CRC)、角化组织宽度(KTW)和牙龈厚度(GT)的变化、患者的不适感和满意度以及手术持续时间:结果:两组患者的愈合都很顺利。12 个月后,与基线相比,两种治疗方法都能显著改善 REC 和 GT(P < 0.05)。MCAF 组的 mRC 测量值为 79.95 ± 29.92%,而 MCAT 组为 64.74 ± 40.5%(p =;0.124)。在 65.6% 的 MCAF 治疗部位和 52% 的 MCAT 治疗部位发现了 CRC(p=0.181):结论:在使用 MCAF 或 MCAT 治疗 MAGRs 并辅以 VCMX 时,应能获得相似的临床结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
6.20%
发文量
113
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry will publish manuscripts concerned with all aspects of clinical periodontology, restorative dentistry, and implantology. This includes pertinent research as well as clinical methodology (their interdependence and relationship should be addressed where applicable); proceedings of relevant symposia or conferences; and quality review papers. Original manuscripts are considered for publication on the condition that they have not been published or submitted for publication elsewhere.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信