Root coverage of multiple gingival recessions treated with coronally advanced flap associated with xenogeneic acellular dermal matrix or connective tissue graft: a 6-month split-mouth controlled and randomized clinical trial

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renato Maluta ◽  
Mabelle Freitas Monteiro ◽  
Daiane Cristina Peruzzo ◽  
Julio Cesar Joly
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Connective Tissue ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trial ◽  
Acellular Dermal Matrix ◽  
Root Coverage ◽  
Dermal Matrix ◽  
Coronally Advanced Flap ◽  
Connective Tissue Graft ◽  
Tissue Graft ◽  
Acellular Dermal

scholarly journals ROOT COVERAGE USING THE SUBEPITHELIAL CONNECTIVE TISSUE GRAFT OR THE ACELLULAR DERMAL MATRIX FOR THE TREATMENT OF GINGIVAL RECESSION: A CLINICAL STUDY

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 20
Author(s):  
Shula Zuleika Sumana ◽  
Sri Lelyati C Masulili ◽  
Robert Lessang
Keyword(s):  
Connective Tissue ◽  
Acellular Dermal Matrix ◽  
Gingival Recession ◽  
Root Coverage ◽  
Dermal Matrix ◽  
Connective Tissue Graft ◽  
Tissue Graft ◽  
Operative Data ◽  
Subepithelial Connective Tissue Graft ◽  
Acellular Dermal

Objective: This study aims to evaluate periodontal clinical conditions after treatment for gingival recession (GR) using subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) and acellular dermal matrix (ADM).Methods: Ten patients with Miller’s Class I and II recessions that had been treated with SCTG or ADM at the Periodontics Outpatient Department at Universitas Indonesia were selected for this study. The pre-operative data for GR, clinical attachment levels (CAL), and attached gingiva (AG) were retrieved from the patients’ medical records. The patients were recalled and the post-operative data were recorded.Results: The application of SCTG and ADM yields significant changes to GR, CAL, and AG levels. A comparison of two groups at the post-operative assessment stage showed no statistically significant differences, in terms of GR, CAL, and AG.Conclusion: SCTG and ADM yield similar outcomes in the treatment of GR. As such, ADM may be suggested as an alternative to SCTG for root coverage.

scholarly journals Acellular dermal matrix and gingival connective in the treatment of periodontal recessions – comparative clinical evaluation in humans

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mauricio Augusto Aquino Castro ◽  
Fabiano Araújo Cunha ◽  
Fernando Oliveira Costa ◽  
Elton Gonçalves Zenóbio ◽  
Maria Aparecida Gonçalves de Melo Cunha
Keyword(s):  
Connective Tissue ◽  
Acellular Dermal Matrix ◽  
Root Coverage ◽  
Dermal Matrix ◽  
Connective Tissue Graft ◽  
Tissue Graft ◽  
High Predictability ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Acellular Dermal ◽  
Group 1

ABSTRACTDifferent periodontal surgical techniques have been proposed for the treatment of periodontal recessions. Among these, the graft of gingival connective tissue stands out for the high predictability of success. This work compared the clinical outcomes of treatment of periodontal recessions, using the gingival connective tissue grafts and acellular dermal matrix. A total of 72 recessions constituted the sample, divided equally into 2 groups. Group 1: treated with acellular dermal matrix graft (MDA) associated with the displaced: Group 2: treated with gingival connective tissue graft, also associated with the flap offset coronally. We evaluated the clinical parameters of probing depth, insert, clinical periodontal recession towards coronal-apical diameter mesio-distal of recessions, keratinized and mucosa thickness flap and influence of grafts in relation to root coverage. The initial measures were compared to those obtained with 45, 90 and 120 days after surgery. No statistically significant differences were found between the groups in terms of reduction of periodontal recessions, keratinized and mucosa flap thickness and of grafts in relation to root coverage. The Group 2 (CG) showed statistically significant reduction in the depth of drilling and clinical level of insertion, compared to group 1 (MDA). However, these differences were not clinically relevant. It was concluded that both the gingival connective tissue graft as the acellular dermal matrix can be used in the treatment of periodontal recessions, with a high predictability of success.Keywords: Gingival recession, connective tissue graft, acellular dermal matrix, periodontal surgery, gum recession, root coverage.

scholarly journals Comparison of acellular dermal matrix allograft (ADMA) and a subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) for the treatment of gingival recession

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-17
Author(s):  
Niloofar Jenabian ◽  
Mohadese Yazdanpanahbahabadi ◽  
Parya Haghpanah Aski ◽  
Ali Bijani
Keyword(s):  
Connective Tissue ◽  
Test Group ◽  
Acellular Dermal Matrix ◽  
Gingival Recession ◽  
Root Coverage ◽  
Dermal Matrix ◽  
Connective Tissue Graft ◽  
Tissue Graft ◽  
Subepithelial Connective Tissue Graft ◽  
Acellular Dermal

Background. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of acellular dermal matrix allograft (ADMA) for the treatment of gingival recession as a substitute for subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG). Methods. In this controlled clinical trial, 18 teeth were selected in nine subjects with bilateral gingival recession. One side was treated with SCTG and a coronally displaced flap as the control group, and the other side was treated with ADMA and a coronally displaced flap as the test group. Probing pocket depth (PPD), clinical attachment level, vertical recession depth, recession width, gingival thickness, keratinized tissue width, and the root coverage percentage were measured before the surgery and at 1-, 3-, and 6-month postoperative intervals. The healing index, pain index, and patient satisfaction were also investigated. The data were analyzed with a general linear model (GLM) repeated measures and paired t-test. Results. All the parameters improved except for PPD; however, a comparison between the groups did not reveal statistically significant differences. Only root coverage percentage and pain index were significantly lower in the test group. The average percentage of root coverage in the control and test groups were 82.01±16.62% and 64.44±9.4%, respectively. Conclusion. Both methods resulted in improvements in the clinical results. However, the use of the ADMA led to less pain and root coverage in comparison with the SCTG method.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document