Yarkaç Fatma Uçan, Şen Dilek Özkan, Yildirim Kevser, Eroğlu Zeynep Taştan, Babayiğit Osman
Department of Periodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Necmettin Erbakan University, Konya, Turkey.
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2025 Aug 3. doi: 10.1111/jerd.70018.
This clinical study aimed to compare the short-term (6-month) outcomes of root coverage using a subepithelial connective tissue graft with either a modified coronally advanced flap or the tunnel technique in the treatment of recession type I multiple gingival recessions.
A total of 29 patients (9 males, 20 females) aged 19-59 years were included, with 68 gingival recession defects (24 in the mandible and 44 in the maxilla). Participants were divided into two groups: Group 1 (n = 14) received root coverage using a subepithelial connective tissue graft with the modified coronally advanced flap, while Group 2 (n = 15) was treated using the tunnel technique. Clinical and esthetic outcomes were assessed at 1 and 6 months postoperatively.
At the 6-month follow-up, no statistically significant differences were found between the groups in plaque index, gingival index, papilla height, papilla width, clinical attachment level, or probing depth (p > 0.05). While recession depth significantly decreased and keratinized gingival width increased in both groups (p < 0.05), no intergroup differences were observed (p > 0.05). Mean root coverage was 54.26% ± 29.5% in Group 1 and 63% ± 36% in Group 2 (p > 0.05). Esthetic outcomes were evaluated using the Root Coverage Esthetic Score (RES), with mean scores of 6.41 ± 2.02 in Group 1 and 6.94 ± 2.09 in Group 2; no significant difference was observed between the groups (p > 0.05).
Within the study's limitations, both surgical techniques yielded comparable clinical and esthetic outcomes at 6 months.
In this study, the clinical and esthetic outcomes of treating patients with multiple gingival recession defects using a subepithelial connective tissue graft with either the modified coronally advanced flap technique or the tunnel technique were compared. The results demonstrated that both techniques achieved successful outcomes.
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06509165.
本临床研究旨在比较使用上皮下结缔组织移植联合改良冠向推进瓣或隧道技术治疗Ⅰ型牙龈退缩性多处牙龈退缩的短期(6个月)疗效。
共纳入29例年龄在19 - 59岁的患者(9例男性,20例女性),有68处牙龈退缩缺损(下颌24处,上颌44处)。参与者被分为两组:第1组(n = 14)采用上皮下结缔组织移植联合改良冠向推进瓣进行根面覆盖,而第2组(n = 15)采用隧道技术治疗。术后1个月和6个月评估临床和美学效果。
在6个月的随访中,两组在菌斑指数、牙龈指数、龈乳头高度、龈乳头宽度、临床附着水平或探诊深度方面均未发现统计学上的显著差异(p > 0.05)。虽然两组的退缩深度均显著降低,角化龈宽度均增加(p < 0.05),但组间未观察到差异(p > 0.05)。第1组的平均根面覆盖率为54.26% ± 29.5%,第2组为63% ± 36%(p > 0.05)。使用根面覆盖美学评分(RES)评估美学效果,第1组的平均评分为6.41 ± 2.02,第2组为6.94 ± 2.09;两组之间未观察到显著差异(p > 0.05)。
在本研究的局限性范围内,两种手术技术在6个月时产生了相当的临床和美学效果。
在本研究中,比较了使用上皮下结缔组织移植联合改良冠向推进瓣技术或隧道技术治疗多处牙龈退缩缺损患者的临床和美学效果。结果表明两种技术均取得了成功的效果。
ClinicalTrials.gov标识符:NCT06509165。