File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Coronally advanced flap and composite restoration of the enamel with or without connective tissue graft for the treatment of single maxillary gingival recession with non‐carious cervical lesion. A randomized controlled clinical trial

TitleCoronally advanced flap and composite restoration of the enamel with or without connective tissue graft for the treatment of single maxillary gingival recession with non‐carious cervical lesion. A randomized controlled clinical trial
Authors
Keywordsaesthetics
connective tissue graft
coronally advanced flap
gingival recession
multiple gingival recessions
Issue Date2020
PublisherWiley-Blackwell Publishing, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1600-051X
Citation
Journal of Clinical Periodontology, 2020, v. 47 n. 3, p. 362-371 How to Cite?
AbstractBackground: Aim of this study was to compare coronally advanced flap (CAF) and composite restoration of the cement–enamel junction (CEJ) with or without connective tissue graft (CTG) for treatment of single maxillary gingival recession with non‐carious cervical lesion (NCCL). Material and Methods: Thirty patients with single gingival recessions and previously restored NCCL were randomly allocated to the two groups. A masked examiner evaluated recession reduction (RecRed), complete root coverage (CRC), keratinized tissue (KT) gain, increase in gingival thickness (GT), patient satisfaction and Root coverage Esthetic Score (RES). Results: No significant difference for RecRed and CRC was detected at 12 months. CAF + CTG resulted in greater increase of KT width and thickness (p < .001). An interaction between baseline GT and type of treatment was reported, suggesting that when baseline GT was ≤0.84 mm adding CTG led to higher RecRed, while for values >0.84 mm the use of CAF was associated with better outcomes. Similarly, CAF alone provided better final RES score for baseline GT > 0.82 mm. Conclusion: Both procedures were effective for root coverage at single RT1 recession with previously restored CEJ. Adding a CTG under CAF should be considered for Rec with thin gingival phenotype.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/281214
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 5.8
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 2.249
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorCairo, F-
dc.contributor.authorCortellini, P-
dc.contributor.authorNieri, M-
dc.contributor.authorPilloni, A-
dc.contributor.authorBarbato, L-
dc.contributor.authorPagavino, G-
dc.contributor.authorTonetti, M-
dc.date.accessioned2020-03-09T09:51:41Z-
dc.date.available2020-03-09T09:51:41Z-
dc.date.issued2020-
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Clinical Periodontology, 2020, v. 47 n. 3, p. 362-371-
dc.identifier.issn0303-6979-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/281214-
dc.description.abstractBackground: Aim of this study was to compare coronally advanced flap (CAF) and composite restoration of the cement–enamel junction (CEJ) with or without connective tissue graft (CTG) for treatment of single maxillary gingival recession with non‐carious cervical lesion (NCCL). Material and Methods: Thirty patients with single gingival recessions and previously restored NCCL were randomly allocated to the two groups. A masked examiner evaluated recession reduction (RecRed), complete root coverage (CRC), keratinized tissue (KT) gain, increase in gingival thickness (GT), patient satisfaction and Root coverage Esthetic Score (RES). Results: No significant difference for RecRed and CRC was detected at 12 months. CAF + CTG resulted in greater increase of KT width and thickness (p < .001). An interaction between baseline GT and type of treatment was reported, suggesting that when baseline GT was ≤0.84 mm adding CTG led to higher RecRed, while for values >0.84 mm the use of CAF was associated with better outcomes. Similarly, CAF alone provided better final RES score for baseline GT > 0.82 mm. Conclusion: Both procedures were effective for root coverage at single RT1 recession with previously restored CEJ. Adding a CTG under CAF should be considered for Rec with thin gingival phenotype.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherWiley-Blackwell Publishing, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1600-051X-
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Clinical Periodontology-
dc.rightsPreprint This is the pre-peer reviewed version of the following article: [FULL CITE], which has been published in final form at [Link to final article using the DOI]. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Use of Self-Archived Versions. Postprint This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: [FULL CITE], which has been published in final form at [Link to final article using the DOI]. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Use of Self-Archived Versions.-
dc.subjectaesthetics-
dc.subjectconnective tissue graft-
dc.subjectcoronally advanced flap-
dc.subjectgingival recession-
dc.subjectmultiple gingival recessions-
dc.titleCoronally advanced flap and composite restoration of the enamel with or without connective tissue graft for the treatment of single maxillary gingival recession with non‐carious cervical lesion. A randomized controlled clinical trial-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.emailTonetti, M: tonetti@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authorityTonetti, M=rp02178-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/jcpe.13229-
dc.identifier.pmid31811742-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85078316955-
dc.identifier.hkuros309304-
dc.identifier.volume47-
dc.identifier.issue3-
dc.identifier.spage362-
dc.identifier.epage371-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000505964600001-
dc.publisher.placeUnited States-
dc.identifier.issnl0303-6979-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats