Cargando…

The comparison of modified semilunar technique in conjunction with connective tissue and subepithelial connective tissue graft for root coverage: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Gingival recession may result in aesthetically unfavourable effects, difficulty in plaque control, increased susceptibility to root caries, and dentin hypersensitivity. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the use of modified semilunar techniques with connective tissue and sub...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jenabian, Niloofar, Khanjani, Nafiseh, Bijani, Ali
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Electronic physician 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5410894/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28465795
http://dx.doi.org/10.19082/3699
_version_ 1783232754389876736
author Jenabian, Niloofar
Khanjani, Nafiseh
Bijani, Ali
author_facet Jenabian, Niloofar
Khanjani, Nafiseh
Bijani, Ali
author_sort Jenabian, Niloofar
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Gingival recession may result in aesthetically unfavourable effects, difficulty in plaque control, increased susceptibility to root caries, and dentin hypersensitivity. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the use of modified semilunar techniques with connective tissue and subepithelial connective tissue grafts (Langer) for denuded root surface coverage. METHODS: In this randomized clinical trial, fourteen localized recessions of Miller class I to II were treated in 5 subjects. Recessions were randomly treated with modified semilunar techniques (test group) and a subepithelial connective tissue graft (control group). Clinical parameters such as clinical attachment level (CAL), keratinized tissue width (KTW), probing pocket depth (PPD), vertical recession depth (VRD) and recession width (RW)were recorded at base line, 1, 3 and 6 months after surgery and healing index and the subject’s satisfaction was evaluated. The repeated measure test and paired-sample t-test were used for statistical analyses by SPSS. RESULTS: Both methods showed significant improvement in clinical parameters. The healing index (HI) in the test group was a slightly more than the control group in Day 10. Aesthetic VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) levels in the test group were more than the control group in 1, 3 and 6 months (test group, in 1 month 6.57±1.13, in 3 month 7.86±1.07, in 6 month 8.00±0.81. control group in 1 month 5.57±1.13, in 3 month 7.00±1.00, in 6 month 7.14±0.90). The KTW, CAL, VRD and RW level’s difference in the test and control group was significant in 6 month compared to the base line (p=0.000). CONCLUSIONS: The present study shows that treatment of Miller Class I and II gingival recession by the modified semilunar technique is acceptable. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered at the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (http://www.irct.ir) with the Irct ID: IRCT201512021760N43. Date registered: December 27, 2015. FUNDING: The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5410894
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Electronic physician
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54108942017-05-02 The comparison of modified semilunar technique in conjunction with connective tissue and subepithelial connective tissue graft for root coverage: a randomized controlled trial Jenabian, Niloofar Khanjani, Nafiseh Bijani, Ali Electron Physician Original Article BACKGROUND: Gingival recession may result in aesthetically unfavourable effects, difficulty in plaque control, increased susceptibility to root caries, and dentin hypersensitivity. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the use of modified semilunar techniques with connective tissue and subepithelial connective tissue grafts (Langer) for denuded root surface coverage. METHODS: In this randomized clinical trial, fourteen localized recessions of Miller class I to II were treated in 5 subjects. Recessions were randomly treated with modified semilunar techniques (test group) and a subepithelial connective tissue graft (control group). Clinical parameters such as clinical attachment level (CAL), keratinized tissue width (KTW), probing pocket depth (PPD), vertical recession depth (VRD) and recession width (RW)were recorded at base line, 1, 3 and 6 months after surgery and healing index and the subject’s satisfaction was evaluated. The repeated measure test and paired-sample t-test were used for statistical analyses by SPSS. RESULTS: Both methods showed significant improvement in clinical parameters. The healing index (HI) in the test group was a slightly more than the control group in Day 10. Aesthetic VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) levels in the test group were more than the control group in 1, 3 and 6 months (test group, in 1 month 6.57±1.13, in 3 month 7.86±1.07, in 6 month 8.00±0.81. control group in 1 month 5.57±1.13, in 3 month 7.00±1.00, in 6 month 7.14±0.90). The KTW, CAL, VRD and RW level’s difference in the test and control group was significant in 6 month compared to the base line (p=0.000). CONCLUSIONS: The present study shows that treatment of Miller Class I and II gingival recession by the modified semilunar technique is acceptable. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered at the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (http://www.irct.ir) with the Irct ID: IRCT201512021760N43. Date registered: December 27, 2015. FUNDING: The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Electronic physician 2017-02-25 /pmc/articles/PMC5410894/ /pubmed/28465795 http://dx.doi.org/10.19082/3699 Text en © 2017 The Authors This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/) , which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Article
Jenabian, Niloofar
Khanjani, Nafiseh
Bijani, Ali
The comparison of modified semilunar technique in conjunction with connective tissue and subepithelial connective tissue graft for root coverage: a randomized controlled trial
title The comparison of modified semilunar technique in conjunction with connective tissue and subepithelial connective tissue graft for root coverage: a randomized controlled trial
title_full The comparison of modified semilunar technique in conjunction with connective tissue and subepithelial connective tissue graft for root coverage: a randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr The comparison of modified semilunar technique in conjunction with connective tissue and subepithelial connective tissue graft for root coverage: a randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed The comparison of modified semilunar technique in conjunction with connective tissue and subepithelial connective tissue graft for root coverage: a randomized controlled trial
title_short The comparison of modified semilunar technique in conjunction with connective tissue and subepithelial connective tissue graft for root coverage: a randomized controlled trial
title_sort comparison of modified semilunar technique in conjunction with connective tissue and subepithelial connective tissue graft for root coverage: a randomized controlled trial
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5410894/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28465795
http://dx.doi.org/10.19082/3699
work_keys_str_mv AT jenabianniloofar thecomparisonofmodifiedsemilunartechniqueinconjunctionwithconnectivetissueandsubepithelialconnectivetissuegraftforrootcoveragearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT khanjaninafiseh thecomparisonofmodifiedsemilunartechniqueinconjunctionwithconnectivetissueandsubepithelialconnectivetissuegraftforrootcoveragearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT bijaniali thecomparisonofmodifiedsemilunartechniqueinconjunctionwithconnectivetissueandsubepithelialconnectivetissuegraftforrootcoveragearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT jenabianniloofar comparisonofmodifiedsemilunartechniqueinconjunctionwithconnectivetissueandsubepithelialconnectivetissuegraftforrootcoveragearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT khanjaninafiseh comparisonofmodifiedsemilunartechniqueinconjunctionwithconnectivetissueandsubepithelialconnectivetissuegraftforrootcoveragearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT bijaniali comparisonofmodifiedsemilunartechniqueinconjunctionwithconnectivetissueandsubepithelialconnectivetissuegraftforrootcoveragearandomizedcontrolledtrial