Skip to main content
MedPathMedPath Home
Clinical Trials/NCT03354104
NCT03354104
Unknown
Not Applicable

Tunnel Technique With Emdogain® in Addition to Connective Tissue Graft Compared With Connective Tissue Graft Alone for the Treatment of Gingival (Periodontal?) Recessions: a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Medical University of Warsaw1 site in 1 country30 target enrollmentJanuary 22, 2018
Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to LinkedInShare to Reddit
ConditionsGingival Recession

Overview

Phase
Not Applicable
Intervention
Not specified
Conditions
Gingival Recession
Sponsor
Medical University of Warsaw
Enrollment
30
Locations
1
Primary Endpoint
Clinical attachment level (CAL)
Last Updated
8 years ago
OverviewInvestigatorsEligibility CriteriaOutcomesSitesSimilar Trials

Overview

Brief Summary

Microsurgical tunneling flap procedures using connective tissue grafts (CTG) are predictable for treating teeth with gingival recessions. Enamel matrix derivatives (EMD) can be used as an alternative to the aforementioned gold standard. The aim of this study is to evaluate clinically the use of tunnel technique with EMD applied group in addition to CTG and the same technique with CTG group for the treatment of multiple gingival recessions.

Registry
clinicaltrials.gov
Start Date
January 22, 2018
End Date
May 5, 2019
Last Updated
8 years ago
Study Type
Interventional
Study Design
Parallel
Sex
All

Investigators

Sponsor
Medical University of Warsaw
Responsible Party
Sponsor

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • •Age ≥ 18 years
  • •Bilateral multiple gingival recessions in homologous teeth

Exclusion Criteria

  • •Full-mouth plaque index ≥ 20% (Ainamo \& Bay 1975)
  • •Full-mouth sulcus bleeding index ≥ 15% (Mühlemann \& Son 1971)
  • •Systemic diseases with compromised healing potential of infectious diseases
  • •Drugs affecting periodontal health / healing
  • •Pregnant and lactating females
  • •Previous periodontal surgery in the area

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Clinical attachment level (CAL)

Time Frame: 6 months after surgery

Distance from the cementoenamel junction to the bottom of the gingival sulcus

Secondary Outcomes

  • Recession height (RH)(6 months after surgery)
  • Recession width (RW)(6 months after surgery)
  • Width of keratinized tissue (WKT)(6 months after surgery)
  • Thickness of keratinized tissue (TKT)(6 months after surgery)
  • Average recession coverage (ARC)(6 months after surgery)
  • Complete recession coverage(6 months after surgery)

Study Sites (1)

Loading locations...

Similar Trials

Unknown
Not Applicable
MCAT With HA and sCTG Compared With sCTG Alone for Treatment of Multiple Gingival Recession: Clinical TrialGingival Recession
NCT05045586Medical University of Warsaw15
Completed
Not Applicable
Tunnel vs. CAF for the Treatment of Multiple Gingival RecessionsGingival Recession
NCT05122468Universidad Complutense de Madrid30
Completed
Not Applicable
Laterally Closed Tunnel VS Tunneling Technique in Recession Type 2Gingival Recession
NCT03791554Cairo University24
Recruiting
Not Applicable
Effectiveness of Micro Connective Tissue Graft for Treatment of Multiple Adjacent Gingival Recession DefectsGingival Recession, Localized
NCT06030947Göteborg University30
Completed
Not Applicable
Tunnel Access for Lateral Alveolar Ridge AugmentationBone LossImplant Site Injury
NCT05475730D'Albis Dental5