Giovanna Laura Di Domenico, Davide Guglielmi, Sofia Aroca, Massimo de Sanctis
{"title":"使用冠状前移皮瓣与使用体积稳定的胶原基质的改良冠状前移隧道治疗多个邻近牙龈凹陷:一项为期 12 个月的随机对照临床试验。","authors":"Giovanna Laura Di Domenico, Davide Guglielmi, Sofia Aroca, Massimo de Sanctis","doi":"10.11607/prd.6796","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The introduction of a new collagen substitute, which will potentially reduce the invasiveness of techniques by avoiding the need for a second surgical site (ie, the donor site), needs to be evaluated in relation to the surgical procedure that could benefit the most by utilizing such a matrix. This study compared the clinical outcomes following treatment of RT1 multiple adjacent gingival recessions (MAGRs) using the modified coronally advanced tunnel (MCAT) technique or the multiple coro- nally advanced flap (MCAF) in conjunction with a new volume-stable xenogeneic collagen matrix (VXCM). Secondarily, the study evaluated whether patients report a preference between the two surgical techniques in terms of discomfort. A total of 20 patients requiring treatment of MAGRs were randomly assigned to one of the two treatment groups: MCAF+VCMX (Group A) or MCAT+VCMX (Group B). The following measurements were recorded at baseline (before surgery) and at 6 and 12 months: gingival recession depth (REC), probing pocket depth (PD), keratinized tissue width (KTW), and gingival thickness (GT). Postoperative pain and discomfort were recorded using a visual analog scale (VAS) at 1 week. The primary outcome variable was mean root coverage (mRC), and second- ary outcomes were complete root coverage (CRC), changes in KTW and GT, patient discomfort and satisfaction, and duration of surgery. Healing was uneventful in both groups. At 12 months, both treatments resulted in statistically significant improvements in REC and GT compared to baseline (P < .05). The mRC was 79.95% ± 29.92% in the MCAF group and 64.74% ± 40.5% in the MCAT group (P = .124). CRC was seen in 65.6% of MCAF-treated sites and 52% of MCAT-treated sites (P = .181). Similar clinical results should be expected when MAGRs are treated with MCAF or MCAT, with the adjunct of VCMX.</p>","PeriodicalId":54948,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry","volume":" ","pages":"498-509"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Treatment of Multiple Adjacent Gingival Recessions with a Coronally Advanced Flap vs a Modified Coronally Advanced Tunnel with a Volumetrically Stable Collagen Matrix: A 12-Month Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Giovanna Laura Di Domenico, Davide Guglielmi, Sofia Aroca, Massimo de Sanctis\",\"doi\":\"10.11607/prd.6796\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The introduction of a new collagen substitute, which will potentially reduce the invasiveness of techniques by avoiding the need for a second surgical site (ie, the donor site), needs to be evaluated in relation to the surgical procedure that could benefit the most by utilizing such a matrix. This study compared the clinical outcomes following treatment of RT1 multiple adjacent gingival recessions (MAGRs) using the modified coronally advanced tunnel (MCAT) technique or the multiple coro- nally advanced flap (MCAF) in conjunction with a new volume-stable xenogeneic collagen matrix (VXCM). Secondarily, the study evaluated whether patients report a preference between the two surgical techniques in terms of discomfort. A total of 20 patients requiring treatment of MAGRs were randomly assigned to one of the two treatment groups: MCAF+VCMX (Group A) or MCAT+VCMX (Group B). The following measurements were recorded at baseline (before surgery) and at 6 and 12 months: gingival recession depth (REC), probing pocket depth (PD), keratinized tissue width (KTW), and gingival thickness (GT). Postoperative pain and discomfort were recorded using a visual analog scale (VAS) at 1 week. The primary outcome variable was mean root coverage (mRC), and second- ary outcomes were complete root coverage (CRC), changes in KTW and GT, patient discomfort and satisfaction, and duration of surgery. Healing was uneventful in both groups. At 12 months, both treatments resulted in statistically significant improvements in REC and GT compared to baseline (P < .05). The mRC was 79.95% ± 29.92% in the MCAF group and 64.74% ± 40.5% in the MCAT group (P = .124). CRC was seen in 65.6% of MCAF-treated sites and 52% of MCAT-treated sites (P = .181). Similar clinical results should be expected when MAGRs are treated with MCAF or MCAT, with the adjunct of VCMX.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54948,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"498-509\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.11607/prd.6796\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/prd.6796","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Treatment of Multiple Adjacent Gingival Recessions with a Coronally Advanced Flap vs a Modified Coronally Advanced Tunnel with a Volumetrically Stable Collagen Matrix: A 12-Month Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.
The introduction of a new collagen substitute, which will potentially reduce the invasiveness of techniques by avoiding the need for a second surgical site (ie, the donor site), needs to be evaluated in relation to the surgical procedure that could benefit the most by utilizing such a matrix. This study compared the clinical outcomes following treatment of RT1 multiple adjacent gingival recessions (MAGRs) using the modified coronally advanced tunnel (MCAT) technique or the multiple coro- nally advanced flap (MCAF) in conjunction with a new volume-stable xenogeneic collagen matrix (VXCM). Secondarily, the study evaluated whether patients report a preference between the two surgical techniques in terms of discomfort. A total of 20 patients requiring treatment of MAGRs were randomly assigned to one of the two treatment groups: MCAF+VCMX (Group A) or MCAT+VCMX (Group B). The following measurements were recorded at baseline (before surgery) and at 6 and 12 months: gingival recession depth (REC), probing pocket depth (PD), keratinized tissue width (KTW), and gingival thickness (GT). Postoperative pain and discomfort were recorded using a visual analog scale (VAS) at 1 week. The primary outcome variable was mean root coverage (mRC), and second- ary outcomes were complete root coverage (CRC), changes in KTW and GT, patient discomfort and satisfaction, and duration of surgery. Healing was uneventful in both groups. At 12 months, both treatments resulted in statistically significant improvements in REC and GT compared to baseline (P < .05). The mRC was 79.95% ± 29.92% in the MCAF group and 64.74% ± 40.5% in the MCAT group (P = .124). CRC was seen in 65.6% of MCAF-treated sites and 52% of MCAT-treated sites (P = .181). Similar clinical results should be expected when MAGRs are treated with MCAF or MCAT, with the adjunct of VCMX.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry will
publish manuscripts concerned with all aspects of clinical periodontology,
restorative dentistry, and implantology. This includes pertinent research
as well as clinical methodology (their interdependence and relationship
should be addressed where applicable); proceedings of relevant symposia
or conferences; and quality review papers. Original manuscripts are considered for publication on the condition that they have not been published
or submitted for publication elsewhere.