The aim of this multi-centre, randomized controlled trial was to compare the clinical outcomes of Connective Tissue Graft alone (CTG) or in combination with Enamel Matrix Derivative (CTG+EMD) in the treatment of Miller Class I and II gingival recessions. The 56 selected defects were evaluated for probing depth (PD), recession depth (RD), keratinized tissue width (KT) and probing attachment level (PAL) and were measured at baseline and 12 months after treatment. The mean recession reduction was 3.9 ± 0.8 mm for the EMD-treated sites (test) and 3.6 ± 1.5 mm for the control group (p=0.22), corresponding to a mean root coverage of 90% and 80% for the test and control respectively (p=0.05). Complete root coverage could be obtained in 62% of the test sites versus 47% in the control (p=0.27). In conclusion, both procedures provided good soft tissue coverage. The better results of the test group did not achieve a statistical significance level

Sub-Epithelial Connective Tissue Graft for Treatment of Gingival Recessions with and without Enamel Matrix Derivative. A multicentre, randomized controlled clinical trial / G. Rasperini, M. Roccuzzo, L. Francetti, R. Acunzo, D. Consonni, M. Silvestri. - In: THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PERIODONTICS & RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY. - ISSN 0198-7569. - 31:2(2011), pp. 133-139.

Sub-Epithelial Connective Tissue Graft for Treatment of Gingival Recessions with and without Enamel Matrix Derivative. A multicentre, randomized controlled clinical trial

G. Rasperini
Primo
;
L. Francetti;
2011

Abstract

The aim of this multi-centre, randomized controlled trial was to compare the clinical outcomes of Connective Tissue Graft alone (CTG) or in combination with Enamel Matrix Derivative (CTG+EMD) in the treatment of Miller Class I and II gingival recessions. The 56 selected defects were evaluated for probing depth (PD), recession depth (RD), keratinized tissue width (KT) and probing attachment level (PAL) and were measured at baseline and 12 months after treatment. The mean recession reduction was 3.9 ± 0.8 mm for the EMD-treated sites (test) and 3.6 ± 1.5 mm for the control group (p=0.22), corresponding to a mean root coverage of 90% and 80% for the test and control respectively (p=0.05). Complete root coverage could be obtained in 62% of the test sites versus 47% in the control (p=0.27). In conclusion, both procedures provided good soft tissue coverage. The better results of the test group did not achieve a statistical significance level
clinical trial ; gingival recession ; root coverage ; EMD ; enamel matrix derivative ; amelogenin ; connective tissue graft
Settore MED/28 - Malattie Odontostomatologiche
2011
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/156461
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 9
  • Scopus 44
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 46
social impact