K Ito1, K Oshio, N Shiomi, S Murai. 1. Department of Periodontology, Nihon University, School of Dentistry, 1-8-13, Kanda-Surugadai, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 101-8310, Japan. ito-k@dent.nihon-u.ac.jp
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy of guided tissue regeneration with expanded polytetrafluoroethylene membranes to that of free gingival graft for treatment of adjacent facial gingival recession. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Eight adjacent gingival recession sites with Miller class I or II defects containing at least a maxillary or mandibular canine were selected in 6 patients. Four recession sites in 3 patients were treated with guided tissue regeneration, and the other 4 sites in the remaining 3 patients were treated with free gingival graft. Probing depth, gingival recession, attachment level, width of keratinized gingiva, and root coverage were recorded before surgery (baseline) and 6 months and 1 year postoperatively. RESULTS: Statistically significant improvements were found for gingival recession, attachment level, and root coverage from baseline to 6 months and 1 year postoperatively in both groups. Both procedures produced the same average reduction in gingival recession, gain in attachment level, and amount of root coverage after 1 year. Probing depths did not differ between groups throughout the study. The width of keratinized gingiva was significantly greater in the grafted group than in the guided tissue regeneration group. CONCLUSION: Both procedures produced the same average amount of root coverage, reduction in gingival recession, and gain in clinical attachment. The guided tissue regeneration procedure provided a better esthetic appearance without any difference in gingival color or architecture in cases of adjacent facial gingival recession.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy of guided tissue regeneration with expanded polytetrafluoroethylene membranes to that of free gingival graft for treatment of adjacent facial gingival recession. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Eight adjacent gingival recession sites with Miller class I or II defects containing at least a maxillary or mandibular canine were selected in 6 patients. Four recession sites in 3 patients were treated with guided tissue regeneration, and the other 4 sites in the remaining 3 patients were treated with free gingival graft. Probing depth, gingival recession, attachment level, width of keratinized gingiva, and root coverage were recorded before surgery (baseline) and 6 months and 1 year postoperatively. RESULTS: Statistically significant improvements were found for gingival recession, attachment level, and root coverage from baseline to 6 months and 1 year postoperatively in both groups. Both procedures produced the same average reduction in gingival recession, gain in attachment level, and amount of root coverage after 1 year. Probing depths did not differ between groups throughout the study. The width of keratinized gingiva was significantly greater in the grafted group than in the guided tissue regeneration group. CONCLUSION: Both procedures produced the same average amount of root coverage, reduction in gingival recession, and gain in clinical attachment. The guided tissue regeneration procedure provided a better esthetic appearance without any difference in gingival color or architecture in cases of adjacent facial gingival recession.