Xue Fei, Zhang Rui, Zhang Yong, Liu Jia, Cai Yu, Cao Pei, Luan Qingxian
First Clinical Division, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology & Research Center of Engineering and Technology for Computerized Dentistry Ministry of Health, Beijing, PR China.
Third Clinical Division, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology & Research Center of Engineering and Technology for Computerized Dentistry Ministry of Health, Beijing, PR China.
J Dent Sci. 2022 Apr;17(2):725-732. doi: 10.1016/j.jds.2021.10.012. Epub 2021 Nov 9.
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Research into biomaterial alternatives to connective tissue grafts (CTG) is a research hotspot. The purpose of this clinical trial was to compare the effectiveness of root coverage through tunnel technique with concentrated growth factor (CGF) vs CTG in treating multiple gingival recessions using digital measurements.
Seventy Cairo Class I multiple gingival recessions (in 28 patients) were treated with either CGF or CTG combined with coronally advanced tunnel technique. Digital models were obtained at baseline, 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 6 months post-op to compare the gain in gingival height, area, volume, and thickness. Tooth sensitivity, post-operative pain, and healing index were also recorded.
Complete root coverage at 6 months post-op were 47.06% in the CGF group and 77.78% in the CTG groups. Mean root coverages were 80.55% and 96.18%, respectively. No statistical difference was demonstrated between the two groups in terms of gingival area gain at 2 weeks post-op, but the CTG group had greater increases in gingival height, area, volume, and thickness in the period after 2 weeks post-op. Pain scores were statistically significantly lower in the CGF group. At 6 months post-op, sensitivity scores decreased more significantly in the CTG group.
Digital measurements revealed post-operative gingival shrinkage was more pronounced in the CGF group than in the CTG group when combined with coronally advanced tunnel technique. Despite the ease-of-use and minimal post-operative discomfort, it is difficult to achieve similar root coverage outcomes to CTG when using CGF alone in treating multiple gingival recessions.
背景/目的:结缔组织移植(CTG)生物材料替代品的研究是一个热点。本临床试验的目的是通过数字测量比较使用浓缩生长因子(CGF)的隧道技术与CTG覆盖牙根治疗多处牙龈退缩的效果。
70例开罗I类多处牙龈退缩(28例患者)采用CGF或CTG联合冠向推进隧道技术治疗。在基线、术后2周、6周和6个月获取数字模型,以比较牙龈高度、面积、体积和厚度的增加情况。还记录了牙齿敏感性、术后疼痛和愈合指数。
术后6个月,CGF组的完全牙根覆盖率为47.06%,CTG组为77.78%。平均牙根覆盖率分别为80.55%和96.18%。术后2周时,两组在牙龈面积增加方面无统计学差异,但CTG组在术后2周后的时间段内牙龈高度、面积、体积和厚度增加更多。CGF组的疼痛评分在统计学上显著更低。术后6个月,CTG组的敏感性评分下降更显著。
数字测量显示,与冠向推进隧道技术联合使用时,CGF组术后牙龈退缩比CTG组更明显。尽管使用方便且术后不适最小,但单独使用CGF治疗多处牙龈退缩时,难以达到与CTG相似的牙根覆盖效果。