Comparison of Root Coverage by the Subepithelial Connective Tissue Graft With and Without Root Biomodification: A Comprehensive Clinical Study.

BACKGROUND

Being an autologous graft, a subepithelial connective tissue (SECT) graft shows more predictable root coverage better than other techniques. Hence, it is most likely to be widely used for recession treatment. During root planing, a smear layer forms on the root surface that cannot be removed by water or saline rinsing. To remove this smear layer, root biomodification agents are widely used. The present study was conducted to assess the efficacy of an SECT graft for root coverage with and without root biomodification.

METHODS

This study included 20 patients with no gender predilection, with an age range of 24-36 years and a mean age of 27.6 ± 4.24 years. The chosen range facilitated the acquisition of data in a relatively homogeneous population, minimizing the confounding effects of factors such as aging-related tissue changes or early-onset periodontal issues. All 40 sites were treated with the SECT and coronally advanced flap. Root conditioning in controls was done with distilled saline and tested using 24% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) gel (Maquira; STM Meditech, Kerala). At baseline and at one, three, and six months postoperatively, pocket depth (PD) and clinical attachment levels (CALs) were assessed at four sites using a UNC-15 probe, and from the gingival margin to the cementoenamel junction (CEJ), the vertical recession was assessed.

RESULTS

For the buccal surface, CALs were reduced significantly (p < 0.001). Following root conditioning with 24% EDTA, no difference was seen in the CAL in the control and test group either buccally or interproximally with a p-value of greater than 0.05. For PD, following a SECT graft or root conditioning, no significant change was observed in the buccal or interproximal region (p > 0.05). The vertical recession was significantly reduced with a p-value of less than 0.001 and depth coverage of 97.5%. The difference between the two groups was statistically non-significant (p > 0.05). The root surface coverage decreased significantly from 16.6 ± 2.8 to 0.45 ± 0.4 from baseline to six months, which was statistically significant (p < 0.001). This intergroup difference was non-statistical (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The present study concludes that the use of an SECT graft in root coverage can significantly improve the CAL, root surface area, and vertical recession both with and without root biomodification. We conclude that there is a significant decrease in the probing depth following SECT grafting and with root biomodification.