Cargando…
Comparison of two surgical techniques in the treatment of multiple gingival recessions sandwiched with a combination of A-PRF and L-PRF
AIM: The aim of this study is to compare semilunar vestibular incision technique with pouch and tunnel technique in combination with A-PRF and L-PRF for treatment of Miller’s class I and II multiple gingival recessions. METHOD: This is a randomized, controlled, double-blinded, split mouth study whic...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6011223/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29942101 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sdentj.2018.03.002 |
_version_ | 1783333762804744192 |
---|---|
author | Sameera, Shaik Nagasri, Medandrao Aravind Kumar, Pavuluri Indeevar, Pantareddy Raviraj, Kalapala Musalaiah, S.V.V.S. |
author_facet | Sameera, Shaik Nagasri, Medandrao Aravind Kumar, Pavuluri Indeevar, Pantareddy Raviraj, Kalapala Musalaiah, S.V.V.S. |
author_sort | Sameera, Shaik |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIM: The aim of this study is to compare semilunar vestibular incision technique with pouch and tunnel technique in combination with A-PRF and L-PRF for treatment of Miller’s class I and II multiple gingival recessions. METHOD: This is a randomized, controlled, double-blinded, split mouth study which consists of 16 systemically healthy patients with 96 sites and a mean age of 34.2 years, and divided randomly into 2 groups, Group A consists of semilunar vestibular incision technique sandwiched with A-PRF and L-PRF and Group B consists of Pouch and tunnel technique sandwiched with A-PRF and L-PRF. Clinical parameters were recorded at baseline, 3 months and 6 months which include plaque index, gingival index, recession depth, recession width, clinical attachment loss and width of keratinized tissue. RESULTS: All the clinical parameters showed significantly better levels for both the groups from baseline to 6 months. Semilunar vestibular incision technique showed greater significance when compared to pouch and tunnel technique from baseline to 6 months post operatively. CONCLUSION: The combination of A-PRF and L-PRF with pouch and tunnel technique and semilunar vestibular technique showed better outcome 6 months post operatively. Semilunar vestibular incision technique showed promising results than pouch and tunnel technique for the treatment of multiple gingival recessions. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6011223 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-60112232018-06-25 Comparison of two surgical techniques in the treatment of multiple gingival recessions sandwiched with a combination of A-PRF and L-PRF Sameera, Shaik Nagasri, Medandrao Aravind Kumar, Pavuluri Indeevar, Pantareddy Raviraj, Kalapala Musalaiah, S.V.V.S. Saudi Dent J Original Article AIM: The aim of this study is to compare semilunar vestibular incision technique with pouch and tunnel technique in combination with A-PRF and L-PRF for treatment of Miller’s class I and II multiple gingival recessions. METHOD: This is a randomized, controlled, double-blinded, split mouth study which consists of 16 systemically healthy patients with 96 sites and a mean age of 34.2 years, and divided randomly into 2 groups, Group A consists of semilunar vestibular incision technique sandwiched with A-PRF and L-PRF and Group B consists of Pouch and tunnel technique sandwiched with A-PRF and L-PRF. Clinical parameters were recorded at baseline, 3 months and 6 months which include plaque index, gingival index, recession depth, recession width, clinical attachment loss and width of keratinized tissue. RESULTS: All the clinical parameters showed significantly better levels for both the groups from baseline to 6 months. Semilunar vestibular incision technique showed greater significance when compared to pouch and tunnel technique from baseline to 6 months post operatively. CONCLUSION: The combination of A-PRF and L-PRF with pouch and tunnel technique and semilunar vestibular technique showed better outcome 6 months post operatively. Semilunar vestibular incision technique showed promising results than pouch and tunnel technique for the treatment of multiple gingival recessions. Elsevier 2018-07 2018-03-31 /pmc/articles/PMC6011223/ /pubmed/29942101 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sdentj.2018.03.002 Text en © 2018 King Saud University http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Original Article Sameera, Shaik Nagasri, Medandrao Aravind Kumar, Pavuluri Indeevar, Pantareddy Raviraj, Kalapala Musalaiah, S.V.V.S. Comparison of two surgical techniques in the treatment of multiple gingival recessions sandwiched with a combination of A-PRF and L-PRF |
title | Comparison of two surgical techniques in the treatment of multiple gingival recessions sandwiched with a combination of A-PRF and L-PRF |
title_full | Comparison of two surgical techniques in the treatment of multiple gingival recessions sandwiched with a combination of A-PRF and L-PRF |
title_fullStr | Comparison of two surgical techniques in the treatment of multiple gingival recessions sandwiched with a combination of A-PRF and L-PRF |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of two surgical techniques in the treatment of multiple gingival recessions sandwiched with a combination of A-PRF and L-PRF |
title_short | Comparison of two surgical techniques in the treatment of multiple gingival recessions sandwiched with a combination of A-PRF and L-PRF |
title_sort | comparison of two surgical techniques in the treatment of multiple gingival recessions sandwiched with a combination of a-prf and l-prf |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6011223/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29942101 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sdentj.2018.03.002 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sameerashaik comparisonoftwosurgicaltechniquesinthetreatmentofmultiplegingivalrecessionssandwichedwithacombinationofaprfandlprf AT nagasrimedandrao comparisonoftwosurgicaltechniquesinthetreatmentofmultiplegingivalrecessionssandwichedwithacombinationofaprfandlprf AT aravindkumarpavuluri comparisonoftwosurgicaltechniquesinthetreatmentofmultiplegingivalrecessionssandwichedwithacombinationofaprfandlprf AT indeevarpantareddy comparisonoftwosurgicaltechniquesinthetreatmentofmultiplegingivalrecessionssandwichedwithacombinationofaprfandlprf AT ravirajkalapala comparisonoftwosurgicaltechniquesinthetreatmentofmultiplegingivalrecessionssandwichedwithacombinationofaprfandlprf AT musalaiahsvvs comparisonoftwosurgicaltechniquesinthetreatmentofmultiplegingivalrecessionssandwichedwithacombinationofaprfandlprf |