Department of Periodontology, College of Dentistry - FOSJC, UNESP - São Paulo State University, São Paulo, Brazil.
Department of Restorative Dentistry, College of Dentistry - FOSJC, UNESP - São Paulo State University, São Paulo, Brazil.
J Clin Periodontol. 2017 May;44(5):540-547. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12714. Epub 2017 Apr 12.
Although ample evidence supports connective tissue graft (CTG) use for root coverage, there is need for research on recipient site preparation approaches. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of trapezoidal coronally advanced flap (CAF) and coronally advanced tunnel flap (TUN) when used in conjunction with CTG.
Forty-two patients presenting 42 single maxillary, Miller Class I and II, gingival recession defects were randomly assigned to receive either CAF + CTG (N = 21) or TUN + CTG (N = 21). Clinical, patient-centred, and aesthetic outcomes were assessed.
Six months postoperatively, both groups resulted in significant reduction in recession depth and increases in keratinized tissue thickness and width. CAF + CTG and TUN + CTG mean root coverage was 87.2 ± 27.1% and 77.4 ± 20.4% respectively (p = 0.02). Complete root coverage was achieved in 71.4% and 28.6% of defects treated with CAF + CTG and TUN + CTG respectively (p = 0.01). At 7 days postoperatively, TUN + CTG patients reported significantly less pain experience (p = 0.04). Both approaches reduced dentine hypersensitivity by approximately 85% (p < 0.05). Patient-based aesthetic evaluation indicated significant improvement for both groups. Although patient- and professional-based aesthetic assessments revealed no differences between groups, tissue texture was significantly better for TUN + CTG (p = 0.02).
For root coverage of single maxillary recession defects, CAF + CTG was more effective than TUN + CTG (ClinicalTrial.org-NCT02814279).
尽管有大量证据支持使用结缔组织移植物(CTG)进行根覆盖,但仍需要研究受体部位准备方法。本研究的目的是比较梯形冠向推进瓣(CAF)和冠向隧道瓣(TUN)与 CTG 联合使用时的效果。
42 名患者共 42 个上颌、Miller Ⅰ类和Ⅱ类、牙龈退缩缺损,随机分为 CAF+CTG(N=21)或 TUN+CTG(N=21)组。评估临床、以患者为中心和美学结果。
术后 6 个月,两组均显著降低了牙龈退缩深度,增加了角化组织厚度和宽度。CAF+CTG 和 TUN+CTG 的平均根覆盖率分别为 87.2%±27.1%和 77.4%±20.4%(p=0.02)。CAF+CTG 和 TUN+CTG 治疗的缺损中,完全根覆盖分别达到 71.4%和 28.6%(p=0.01)。TUN+CTG 组患者术后 7 天报告的疼痛明显较轻(p=0.04)。两种方法均使牙本质敏感性降低约 85%(p<0.05)。基于患者的美学评估表明两组均有显著改善。尽管患者和专业人员的美学评估显示两组之间没有差异,但 TUN+CTG 的组织纹理明显更好(p=0.02)。
对于单个上颌退缩缺损的根覆盖,CAF+CTG 比 TUN+CTG 更有效(ClinicalTrial.org-NCT02814279)。