Cargando…

Double Lateral Sliding Bridge Flap versus Laterally Closed Tunnel for the Treatment of Single Recessions in the Mandibular Anterior Teeth: A Pseudorandomized Clinical Trial

(1) Background: This study compared the clinical and esthetic results of the double lateral sliding bridge flap (DLSBF) and the laterally closed tunnel (LCT) techniques, with a subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG), for the treatment of single Miller class II-III recessions in the mandibular...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Quispe-López, Norberto, Sánchez-Santos, Juan, Delgado-Gregori, Joaquín, López-Malla Matute, Joaquín, López-Valverde, Nansi, Zubizarreta-Macho, Álvaro, Flores-Fraile, Javier, Gómez-Polo, Cristina, Montero, Javier
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9147998/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35629044
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11102918
_version_ 1784716944736256000
author Quispe-López, Norberto
Sánchez-Santos, Juan
Delgado-Gregori, Joaquín
López-Malla Matute, Joaquín
López-Valverde, Nansi
Zubizarreta-Macho, Álvaro
Flores-Fraile, Javier
Gómez-Polo, Cristina
Montero, Javier
author_facet Quispe-López, Norberto
Sánchez-Santos, Juan
Delgado-Gregori, Joaquín
López-Malla Matute, Joaquín
López-Valverde, Nansi
Zubizarreta-Macho, Álvaro
Flores-Fraile, Javier
Gómez-Polo, Cristina
Montero, Javier
author_sort Quispe-López, Norberto
collection PubMed
description (1) Background: This study compared the clinical and esthetic results of the double lateral sliding bridge flap (DLSBF) and the laterally closed tunnel (LCT) techniques, with a subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG), for the treatment of single Miller class II-III recessions in the mandibular anterior teeth. (2) Methods: This pseudorandomized clinical trial evaluated 14 patients, 7 of whom were part of the DLSBF + SCTG group, with an average follow-up of 58.7 ± 24.0 months, and 7 of whom were in the LCT + SCTG group, with an average follow-up of 16.7 ± 3.3 months. Clinical and esthetic evaluations of the following parameters were performed and the results for the two groups were compared: gingival recession depth, probing depth, keratinized tissue width, gingival thickness, percentage of root coverage and root coverage esthetic score. (3) Results: After the follow-up period, each technique provided evidence of a reduction in recession depth and clinical attachment level, as well as increased keratinized tissue width and gingival thickness, with statistically significant differences (p < 0.05). The analysis showed that gingival recession depth decreased less in the DLSBF group (4.3 ± 1.2 mm to 0.6 ± 1.1 mm) than it did in the LCT group (4.9 ± 1.1 mm to 0.1 ± 0.4 mm), but no significant difference was found between the two groups. Similarly, a greater reduction in the clinical attachment level parameter was observed in the LCT group, while a greater increase in gingival thickness was observed in the DLSBF group. The presence of scars was the only parameter for which statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) between the two study groups were found. (4) Conclusions: Within the limitations of the study, it indicates that the LCT + SCTG technique may be considered an optimal technique in terms of reducing gingival recession depth, complete root coverage and esthetic results for the treatment of single gingival recessions in the mandibular anterior teeth.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9147998
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91479982022-05-29 Double Lateral Sliding Bridge Flap versus Laterally Closed Tunnel for the Treatment of Single Recessions in the Mandibular Anterior Teeth: A Pseudorandomized Clinical Trial Quispe-López, Norberto Sánchez-Santos, Juan Delgado-Gregori, Joaquín López-Malla Matute, Joaquín López-Valverde, Nansi Zubizarreta-Macho, Álvaro Flores-Fraile, Javier Gómez-Polo, Cristina Montero, Javier J Clin Med Article (1) Background: This study compared the clinical and esthetic results of the double lateral sliding bridge flap (DLSBF) and the laterally closed tunnel (LCT) techniques, with a subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG), for the treatment of single Miller class II-III recessions in the mandibular anterior teeth. (2) Methods: This pseudorandomized clinical trial evaluated 14 patients, 7 of whom were part of the DLSBF + SCTG group, with an average follow-up of 58.7 ± 24.0 months, and 7 of whom were in the LCT + SCTG group, with an average follow-up of 16.7 ± 3.3 months. Clinical and esthetic evaluations of the following parameters were performed and the results for the two groups were compared: gingival recession depth, probing depth, keratinized tissue width, gingival thickness, percentage of root coverage and root coverage esthetic score. (3) Results: After the follow-up period, each technique provided evidence of a reduction in recession depth and clinical attachment level, as well as increased keratinized tissue width and gingival thickness, with statistically significant differences (p < 0.05). The analysis showed that gingival recession depth decreased less in the DLSBF group (4.3 ± 1.2 mm to 0.6 ± 1.1 mm) than it did in the LCT group (4.9 ± 1.1 mm to 0.1 ± 0.4 mm), but no significant difference was found between the two groups. Similarly, a greater reduction in the clinical attachment level parameter was observed in the LCT group, while a greater increase in gingival thickness was observed in the DLSBF group. The presence of scars was the only parameter for which statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) between the two study groups were found. (4) Conclusions: Within the limitations of the study, it indicates that the LCT + SCTG technique may be considered an optimal technique in terms of reducing gingival recession depth, complete root coverage and esthetic results for the treatment of single gingival recessions in the mandibular anterior teeth. MDPI 2022-05-22 /pmc/articles/PMC9147998/ /pubmed/35629044 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11102918 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Quispe-López, Norberto
Sánchez-Santos, Juan
Delgado-Gregori, Joaquín
López-Malla Matute, Joaquín
López-Valverde, Nansi
Zubizarreta-Macho, Álvaro
Flores-Fraile, Javier
Gómez-Polo, Cristina
Montero, Javier
Double Lateral Sliding Bridge Flap versus Laterally Closed Tunnel for the Treatment of Single Recessions in the Mandibular Anterior Teeth: A Pseudorandomized Clinical Trial
title Double Lateral Sliding Bridge Flap versus Laterally Closed Tunnel for the Treatment of Single Recessions in the Mandibular Anterior Teeth: A Pseudorandomized Clinical Trial
title_full Double Lateral Sliding Bridge Flap versus Laterally Closed Tunnel for the Treatment of Single Recessions in the Mandibular Anterior Teeth: A Pseudorandomized Clinical Trial
title_fullStr Double Lateral Sliding Bridge Flap versus Laterally Closed Tunnel for the Treatment of Single Recessions in the Mandibular Anterior Teeth: A Pseudorandomized Clinical Trial
title_full_unstemmed Double Lateral Sliding Bridge Flap versus Laterally Closed Tunnel for the Treatment of Single Recessions in the Mandibular Anterior Teeth: A Pseudorandomized Clinical Trial
title_short Double Lateral Sliding Bridge Flap versus Laterally Closed Tunnel for the Treatment of Single Recessions in the Mandibular Anterior Teeth: A Pseudorandomized Clinical Trial
title_sort double lateral sliding bridge flap versus laterally closed tunnel for the treatment of single recessions in the mandibular anterior teeth: a pseudorandomized clinical trial
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9147998/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35629044
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11102918
work_keys_str_mv AT quispelopeznorberto doublelateralslidingbridgeflapversuslaterallyclosedtunnelforthetreatmentofsinglerecessionsinthemandibularanteriorteethapseudorandomizedclinicaltrial
AT sanchezsantosjuan doublelateralslidingbridgeflapversuslaterallyclosedtunnelforthetreatmentofsinglerecessionsinthemandibularanteriorteethapseudorandomizedclinicaltrial
AT delgadogregorijoaquin doublelateralslidingbridgeflapversuslaterallyclosedtunnelforthetreatmentofsinglerecessionsinthemandibularanteriorteethapseudorandomizedclinicaltrial
AT lopezmallamatutejoaquin doublelateralslidingbridgeflapversuslaterallyclosedtunnelforthetreatmentofsinglerecessionsinthemandibularanteriorteethapseudorandomizedclinicaltrial
AT lopezvalverdenansi doublelateralslidingbridgeflapversuslaterallyclosedtunnelforthetreatmentofsinglerecessionsinthemandibularanteriorteethapseudorandomizedclinicaltrial
AT zubizarretamachoalvaro doublelateralslidingbridgeflapversuslaterallyclosedtunnelforthetreatmentofsinglerecessionsinthemandibularanteriorteethapseudorandomizedclinicaltrial
AT floresfrailejavier doublelateralslidingbridgeflapversuslaterallyclosedtunnelforthetreatmentofsinglerecessionsinthemandibularanteriorteethapseudorandomizedclinicaltrial
AT gomezpolocristina doublelateralslidingbridgeflapversuslaterallyclosedtunnelforthetreatmentofsinglerecessionsinthemandibularanteriorteethapseudorandomizedclinicaltrial
AT monterojavier doublelateralslidingbridgeflapversuslaterallyclosedtunnelforthetreatmentofsinglerecessionsinthemandibularanteriorteethapseudorandomizedclinicaltrial