The aim of this multicenter, randomized controlled trial was to compare the clinical outcomes of a connective tissue graft (CTG) alone 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, recession depth, keratinized tissue width, and probing attachment level, and were measured at baseline and 12 months after treatment. The mean recession reduction was 3.9 ± 0.8 mm for EMD-treated sites (test) and 3.6 ± 1.5 mm for the control group (P = .22), corresponding to a mean root coverage of 90% and 80% for test and control groups, respectively (P = .05). Complete root coverage was obtained in 62% of test sites compared to 47% in the control group (P = .27). Both procedures provided good soft tissue coverage. The better results of the test group did not achieve a statistically significant level.

Subepithelial connective tissue graft for treatment of gingival recessions with and without enamel matrix derivative: a multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial / G. Rasperini, M. Roccuzzo, L.A. Francetti, R. Acunzo, D. Consonni, M. Silvestri. - In: THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PERIODONTICS & RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY. - ISSN 0198-7569. - 31:2(2011), pp. 133-139.

Subepithelial connective tissue graft for treatment of gingival recessions with and without enamel matrix derivative: a multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial

G. Rasperini
Primo
;
L.A. Francetti;
2011

Abstract

The aim of this multicenter, randomized controlled trial was to compare the clinical outcomes of a connective tissue graft (CTG) alone 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, recession depth, keratinized tissue width, and probing attachment level, and were measured at baseline and 12 months after treatment. The mean recession reduction was 3.9 ± 0.8 mm for EMD-treated sites (test) and 3.6 ± 1.5 mm for the control group (P = .22), corresponding to a mean root coverage of 90% and 80% for test and control groups, respectively (P = .05). Complete root coverage was obtained in 62% of test sites compared to 47% in the control group (P = .27). Both procedures provided good soft tissue coverage. The better results of the test group did not achieve a statistically significant level.
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/2434/165700
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 9
  • Scopus 44
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 46
social impact