MedPath

Surgical Treatment of Gingival Recessions

Not Applicable
Completed
Conditions
Microsurgery
Clinical Trial
Connective Tissue
Gingival Recession
Interventions
Procedure: surgical techniques in the treatment of localized gingival recession defects.
Registration Number
NCT04611282
Lead Sponsor
Istanbul Medipol University Hospital
Brief Summary

The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of microsurgical and macrosurgical approaches on CPFs plus SCTGs for the treatment of localized gingival recession defects (Miller class I or II) over the course of 6 months based on clinical periodontal parameters, periodontal phenotypes, and the postoperative complaints and satisfaction levels of the patients. We hypothesized that root coverage achieved through microsurgery in Miller I or II gingival recessions would improve clinical periodontal outcomes and the periodontal phenotype, with greater postoperative comfort and aesthetic satisfaction in comparison with conventional macrosurgical techniques. Miller Class I and II gingival recession defects, at least 3.0 mm deep, were selected and randomly assigned to receive micro or macrosurgical techniques. Both techniques were performed using a coronally positioned flap with a subepithelial connective tissue graft. Plaque and gingival indices, gingival recession depth and width, probing pocket depth, bleeding on probing, clinical attachment level, width of keratinized gingiva, aesthetic score and percentage of root coverage, postoperative complaints, and satisfaction of the participants completing the study were evaluated at follow-up 1st, 3rd and 6th months.

Detailed Description

Not available

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
COMPLETED
Sex
All
Target Recruitment
17
Inclusion Criteria

All participants were:

  • adults aged 18 years or over
  • systemically and periodontally healthy
  • met the eligibility criteria for localized gingival recession of the canine or premolar teeth according to the Miller classification scheme
Exclusion Criteria

Exclusion criteria included the following:

  • medical disorders such as diabetes mellitus, immunologic disorders, and hepatitis;
  • a history of chemotherapy or radiotherapy;
  • a history of alcoholism or drug abuse;
  • a history of previous mucogingival surgery at the gingival recession site;
  • medications known to affect gingival tissues;
  • antibiotic treatment in the past 6 months;
  • smoking >10 cigarettes per day for >5 years, and;
  • current pregnancy or lactation.

Study & Design

Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Design
PARALLEL
Arm && Interventions
GroupInterventionDescription
Microsurgery groupsurgical techniques in the treatment of localized gingival recession defects.All defects were treated with a CPF plus an SCTG by the same investigator using microsurgery technique.
Macrosurgery groupsurgical techniques in the treatment of localized gingival recession defects.All defects were treated with a CPF plus an SCTG by the same investigator using macrosurgery technique.
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Percentage of root coverage6 months

The primary endpoint for efficacy of the gingival recession was the percentage of root coverage at baseline and 6-months postsurgery, as measured by gingival recession depth.

Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Changes in Gingival recession width6 months
visual analog scale6 months

A visual analog scale was used to evaluate postoperative complaints regarding the recipient and donor sites according to graft size and postoperative satisfaction values (level of the gingival margin, gingival tissue color, dentin hypersensitivity, and root coverage) during the follow-up period. A 10 cm VAS, with "none" / "unhappy" at the left end and "unbearable" / "happy" at the right end was prepared for each patient.

Changes in Gingival recession depth6 months
Changes in Keratinized gingival width6 months
© Copyright 2025. All Rights Reserved by MedPath