OBJECTIVES: Various surgical techniques have been proposed for coverage of denuded root surfaces. The aim of this study was to evaluate a comparison of coronally repositioned flap procedure with or without the use of enamel matrix proteins in the treatment of recession defects. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study was an intra-individual longitudinal test of 12 months duration conducted as a blinded, split-mouth, placebo-controlled and randomised design. It was performed in 2 dental schools. 36 patients, aged 22-62 years, with 2 paired buccal recession defects of at least 3 mm participated. Surgical recession coverage was performed as coronally-advanced flap technique at both sites in the same session. One site was additionally treated with commercially-available enamel matrix proteins (Emdogain) and the other site with placebo (propylene glycol alginate) in accordance with the randomisation list. A blinded examiner assessed pre- and post-surgical measurements. Clinical measurements and photographs were taken pre-surgically and after 1 week, 3 weeks, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months, postoperatively. Measurements comprised height and width of the gingival recession, height of keratinized tissue, probing attachment level, probing pocket depth and alveolar bone level by periodontal probe, Florida Probe or caliper to the nearest 0.5 mm. RESULTS: 12 months after therapy, both treatment modalities showed significant root coverage and probing attachment gain. Gingival recession decreased from 3.7 mm to 0.8 mm for the Emdogain treated sites and from 3.9 mm to 1.0 mm for the control sites, corresponding to mean root coverages of 80% and 79%, respectively. This difference was not significant. With the exception of keratinized tissue gain, which was significantly higher (p=0.003) in the Emdogain group, all other clinical variables were not different in the between-group comparison. CONCLUSIONS: As the additional use of Emdogain together with coronally advanced flap technique for recession coverage showed no difference in the overall clinical outcome, there is no clear benefit to combine Emdogain with this surgical technique.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: Various surgical techniques have been proposed for coverage of denuded root surfaces. The aim of this study was to evaluate a comparison of coronally repositioned flap procedure with or without the use of enamel matrix proteins in the treatment of recession defects. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study was an intra-individual longitudinal test of 12 months duration conducted as a blinded, split-mouth, placebo-controlled and randomised design. It was performed in 2 dental schools. 36 patients, aged 22-62 years, with 2 paired buccal recession defects of at least 3 mm participated. Surgical recession coverage was performed as coronally-advanced flap technique at both sites in the same session. One site was additionally treated with commercially-available enamel matrix proteins (Emdogain) and the other site with placebo (propylene glycol alginate) in accordance with the randomisation list. A blinded examiner assessed pre- and post-surgical measurements. Clinical measurements and photographs were taken pre-surgically and after 1 week, 3 weeks, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months, postoperatively. Measurements comprised height and width of the gingival recession, height of keratinized tissue, probing attachment level, probing pocket depth and alveolar bone level by periodontal probe, Florida Probe or caliper to the nearest 0.5 mm. RESULTS: 12 months after therapy, both treatment modalities showed significant root coverage and probing attachment gain. Gingival recession decreased from 3.7 mm to 0.8 mm for the Emdogain treated sites and from 3.9 mm to 1.0 mm for the control sites, corresponding to mean root coverages of 80% and 79%, respectively. This difference was not significant. With the exception of keratinized tissue gain, which was significantly higher (p=0.003) in the Emdogain group, all other clinical variables were not different in the between-group comparison. CONCLUSIONS: As the additional use of Emdogain together with coronally advanced flap technique for recession coverage showed no difference in the overall clinical outcome, there is no clear benefit to combine Emdogain with this surgical technique.