São Paulo State University (Unesp). Division of Periodontics, Institute of Science and Technology, São José dos Campos, São Paulo, Brazil.
University of Kentucky, College of Dentistry, Lexington, Kentucky, USA.
J Periodontol. 2023 Jun;94(6):731-741. doi: 10.1002/JPER.22-0516. Epub 2023 Feb 7.
This study aimed to compare a connective tissue graft (CTG) to a (porcine) xenogeneic acellular dermal matrix (XDM), both associated with modified coronally advanced flap (MCAF) and partial resin composite restoration to treat multiple combined defects (CDs).
Seventy-eight defects in 38 patients presenting multiple combined defects, that is, gingival recession associated with non-carious cervical lesions, were treated by partial resin composite restoration (apical margin up to 1 mm of the estimated cement-enamel junction) and MCAF along with CTG or XDM. After 6 months, the groups were compared with regard to clinical, patient-centered, and esthetic outcomes.
CD coverage was 72.9% for CTG versus 50.7% for XDM (P < 0.001). Recession reduction was 2.3 mm for CTG versus 1.5 mm for XDM (P < 0.001). CTG resulted in a greater increase in keratinized tissue width (CTG: 0.96 mm vs. XDM: 0.3 mm, P = 0.04) and gingival thickness (CTG: 0.9 mm vs. XDM: 0.3 mm, P < 0.001). Both treatments successfully reduced dentin hypersensitivity and increased esthetics satisfaction, with no statistically significant intergroup differences. Moreover, XDM patients experienced a shorter surgery duration (CTG: 57.2 min vs. XDM: 37.4 min, P < 0.001) and less time to no pain (visual analog scale = 0; CTG: 6.5 days vs. XDM: 3.5 days, P = 0.04).
CTG resulted in significantly greater root coverage and increased keratinized tissue width compared to XDM for treating multiple partially restored CDs. However, increased root coverage at the CTG sites was accounted for by increased probing depth compared to the XDM sites.
本研究旨在比较使用结缔组织移植物(CTG)和(猪)去细胞真皮基质(XDM),同时使用改良的冠向推进瓣(MCAF)和部分树脂复合修复体来治疗多个联合缺损(CD)的效果。
38 例患者的 78 个 CD 部位(与非龋性颈病变相关的牙龈退缩)接受了部分树脂复合修复(根尖边缘距估计的牙釉质牙骨质界 1mm 以内)和 MCAF 联合 CTG 或 XDM 治疗。6 个月后,比较两组的临床、患者为中心和美学效果。
CTG 组的 CD 覆盖率为 72.9%,XDM 组为 50.7%(P<0.001)。CTG 组的牙龈退缩减少 2.3mm,XDM 组为 1.5mm(P<0.001)。CTG 组增加的角化组织宽度(CTG:0.96mm 比 XDM:0.3mm,P=0.04)和牙龈厚度(CTG:0.9mm 比 XDM:0.3mm,P<0.001)更大。两种治疗方法均成功降低了牙本质敏感症并提高了美观满意度,且组间无统计学差异。此外,XDM 组的手术时间更短(CTG:57.2 分钟比 XDM:37.4 分钟,P<0.001),无痛时间更短(视觉模拟评分=0;CTG:6.5 天比 XDM:3.5 天,P=0.04)。
与 XDM 相比,CTG 治疗多个部分修复的 CD 时,根面覆盖率显著增加,角化组织宽度增加。然而,与 XDM 部位相比,CTG 部位的根面覆盖率增加是由于探诊深度增加所致。