Suppr超能文献

牙釉质基质衍生物与冠向瓣覆盖边缘组织退缩。

Enamel matrix derivative and coronal flaps to cover marginal tissue recessions.

作者信息

Castellanos Adriana, de la Rosa Manuel, de la Garza Myriam, Caffesse Raul G

机构信息

Graduate Periodontics, Autonomous University of Nuevo Leon, Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, Mexico.

出版信息

J Periodontol. 2006 Jan;77(1):7-14. doi: 10.1902/jop.2006.77.1.7.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Correcting recession defects is one of the goals of periodontal therapy, and the efficacy and predictability of the various techniques are important considerations for both patients and clinicians. Several reports have examined the outcome of gingival recession treatment by means of coronally positioned flaps (CPF) and enamel matrix derivative (EMD). The purpose of this study was to clinically evaluate the use of EMD in association with CPF to cover localized gingival recessions compared to CPF alone.

METHODS

Twenty-two patients with Miller Class I or II gingival recessions >2 mm were included. One recession from each patient was treated in the study. Two treatments were randomly assigned: coronally positioned flap with EMD (test) and coronally positioned flap alone (control). Clinical parameters measured at baseline and 1, 6, and 12 months included gingival index, plaque index, probing depth, clinical attachment level, vertical and horizontal recession, and width of keratinized gingiva.

RESULTS

At 12 months, both treatment modalities showed significant root coverage, gain in clinical attachment, and gain in width of keratinized gingiva (P <0.05). Vertical recessions were reduced from 2.68 +/- 1.63 mm to 0.36 +/- 0.60 mm in the test group and from 2.31 +/- 1.52 mm to 0.90 +/- 0.95 mm in the control group. Horizontal recessions decreased from 4.27 +/- 2.06 mm to 0.77 +/- 0.87 mm in the test group and from 3.68 +/- 1.91 mm to 1.72 +/- 1.31 mm in the control group. Changes in keratinized gingiva went from 3.81 +/- 1.95 mm to 4.63 +/- 2.15 mm in the test group and from 3.31 +/- 1.81 mm to 3.27 +/- 1.80 mm in the control group. When both treatments were compared at 12 months, there was a significant difference in vertical tooth coverage and gain in keratinized gingiva in favor of the experimental group (P <0.05). The average percentage of root coverage for test and control groups was 88.6% and 62.2%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The coronally positioned flap alone or with EMD is an effective procedure to cover localized gingival recessions. The addition of EMD significantly improves the amount of root coverage.

摘要

背景

纠正牙龈退缩缺陷是牙周治疗的目标之一,各种技术的疗效和可预测性是患者和临床医生都需要重点考虑的因素。已有多篇报道探讨了采用冠向复位瓣(CPF)和釉基质衍生物(EMD)治疗牙龈退缩的效果。本研究的目的是通过临床评估,比较单独使用CPF与联合使用EMD覆盖局限性牙龈退缩的效果。

方法

纳入22例患有Miller I类或II类牙龈退缩且退缩程度>2mm的患者。每位患者的一处牙龈退缩纳入本研究。随机分配两种治疗方法:联合EMD的冠向复位瓣(试验组)和单独的冠向复位瓣(对照组)。在基线、1个月、6个月和12个月时测量的临床参数包括牙龈指数、菌斑指数、探诊深度、临床附着水平、垂直和水平向退缩以及角化龈宽度。

结果

在12个月时,两种治疗方式均显示出显著的牙根覆盖、临床附着增加以及角化龈宽度增加(P<0.05)。试验组的垂直向退缩从2.68±1.63mm减少至0.36±0.60mm,对照组从2.31±1.52mm减少至0.90±0.95mm。试验组的水平向退缩从4.27±2.06mm减少至0.77±0.87mm,对照组从3.68±1.91mm减少至1.72±1.31mm。试验组角化龈的变化从3.81±1.95mm变为4.63±2.15mm,对照组从3.31±1.81mm变为3.27±1.80mm。在12个月时比较两种治疗方法,试验组在垂直向牙齿覆盖和角化龈增加方面存在显著差异(P<0.05)。试验组和对照组的平均牙根覆盖百分比分别为88.6%和62.2%。

结论

单独使用冠向复位瓣或联合EMD是覆盖局限性牙龈退缩的有效方法。添加EMD可显著提高牙根覆盖量。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验