Comparison of two techniques in gingival recession treatment A randomized one-year clinical follow-up study

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authoridKeceli, Huseyin Gencay/0000-0001-6695-2133
dc.authoridBarak Dolgun, Anil/0000-0002-2693-0666
dc.authoridOlgun, Ebru/0000-0001-7298-8589
dc.contributor.authorEvginer, Mustafa Serdar
dc.contributor.authorOlgun, Ebru
dc.contributor.authorParlak, Hanife Merva
dc.contributor.authorDolgun, Anil Barak
dc.contributor.authorKeceli, Huseyin Gencay
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-21T16:36:53Z
dc.date.available2025-01-21T16:36:53Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.departmentKırıkkale Üniversitesi
dc.description.abstractBackground. Gingival recession (GR) is highly prevalent in the general population and represents a significant concern for patients and clinicians. Various surgical techniques have been proposed to treat gingival recession. Well-designed trials with clinician-and patient-based parameters, evaluating the envelope connective tissue graft (E-CTG) and semilunar coronally advanced flap (SCAF) techniques are still needed. Objectives. The aim of this trial was to compare the effectiveness of E-CTG and SCAF in the treatment of GR during a 1-year follow-up. Material and methods. A total of 42 patients with GR were treated with E-CTG (n = 20) or SCAF (n = 22). Clinician-based recordings of recession depth (RD), recession width (RW), probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), keratinized tissue width (KTW), tissue thickness (TT), clinical attachment gain (CAG), root coverage (RC), keratinized tissue change (KTC), and wound healing index (WHI), as well as patient-based parameters of dentine hypersensitivity (DH), tissue appearance, patient expectations, and esthetics were collected at baseline (BL), 6 weeks (T1), 6 months (T2), and 1 year (T3). Results. After the treatment, E-CTG demonstrated better outcomes than SCAF in terms of CAG (50.70% vs. 33.33%), RC (85.60% vs. 35.60%) and KTC (1.70 +/- 1.49 mm vs. 0.36 +/- 0.96 mm) at T3. Similar findings were detected in terms of WHI, tissue appearance, patient expectations, and esthetics. Although inconvenient surgical experience was recorded, better results were obtained after E-CTG in terms of DH and meeting the RC expectations. Conclusions. Despite it being more difficult surgical experience and the risk of keloid formation, E-CTG was superior to SCAF in terms of RC percentage, reducing DH and obtaining satisfactory RC. However, it is still necessary to improve patient comfort in the case of E-CTG.
dc.identifier.doi10.17219/dmp/137621
dc.identifier.endpage130
dc.identifier.issn1644-387X
dc.identifier.issn2300-9020
dc.identifier.issue1
dc.identifier.pmid35394710
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85127858934
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ2
dc.identifier.startpage121
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.17219/dmp/137621
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12587/24401
dc.identifier.volume59
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000782976400010
dc.identifier.wosqualityN/A
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherWroclaw Medical Univ
dc.relation.ispartofDental and Medical Problems
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.snmzKA_20241229
dc.subjectgingival recession; connective tissue; treatment outcomes; esthetics; patient-reported outcomes
dc.titleComparison of two techniques in gingival recession treatment A randomized one-year clinical follow-up study
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WOS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu