BACKGROUND: The purpose of this randomized clinical trial was to compare the outcome of gingival recession therapy using the semilunar coronally positioned flap (SCPF) or the subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG). METHODS:Seventeen patients with bilateral Miller Class I buccal gingival recessions (<or=4 mm) in maxillary canines or premolars were selected. The recessions were randomly assigned to receive either the SCPF or the SCTG. Recession height (RH), recession width (RW), width of keratinized tissue (WKT), thickness of keratinized tissue (TKT), probing depth (PD), and clinical attachment level (CAL) were measured at baseline and 6 months post-surgery. Patient satisfaction with esthetics, root sensitivity, and postoperative pain was also evaluated. RESULTS: The average percentages of root coverage for SCPF and SCTG were 90.95% and 96.10% (P<0.05), respectively, and the complete root coverage observed was 52.94% and 76.47%, respectively. The SCTG showed a statistically significant increase in TKT (P<0.05). There were no significant differences between the two groups with regard to RH, RW, WKT, PD, and CAL. The esthetic condition after both treatments was considered satisfactory by the patients. CONCLUSION: The findings from this study indicate that SCPF and SCTG can be successfully used to treat Class I gingival recession.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this randomized clinical trial was to compare the outcome of gingival recession therapy using the semilunar coronally positioned flap (SCPF) or the subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG). METHODS: Seventeen patients with bilateral Miller Class I buccal gingival recessions (<or=4 mm) in maxillary canines or premolars were selected. The recessions were randomly assigned to receive either the SCPF or the SCTG. Recession height (RH), recession width (RW), width of keratinized tissue (WKT), thickness of keratinized tissue (TKT), probing depth (PD), and clinical attachment level (CAL) were measured at baseline and 6 months post-surgery. Patient satisfaction with esthetics, root sensitivity, and postoperative pain was also evaluated. RESULTS: The average percentages of root coverage for SCPF and SCTG were 90.95% and 96.10% (P<0.05), respectively, and the complete root coverage observed was 52.94% and 76.47%, respectively. The SCTG showed a statistically significant increase in TKT (P<0.05). There were no significant differences between the two groups with regard to RH, RW, WKT, PD, and CAL. The esthetic condition after both treatments was considered satisfactory by the patients. CONCLUSION: The findings from this study indicate that SCPF and SCTG can be successfully used to treat Class I gingival recession.