BACKGROUND:Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) was speculated to be a promoter of periodontal regeneration. There are only a few clinical comparative studies using PRP in the treatment of gingival recession. AIM: The aim of the present study was to compare connective tissue graft (CTG)+PRP with CTG alone in the treatment of gingival recession. MATERIAL AND METHODS:Forty patients with Miller I/II recessions were included. Each recession was randomly treated with either CTG+PRP or CTG. Clinical variables were recorded at baseline and at 6 weeks, 6 and 12 months. Root coverage (RC) and attachment gain (AG) were also calculated. RESULTS:Probing depth, recession depth, clinical attachment level, keratinized tissue width and recession width (RW) were improved in both study groups. However, no difference was observed between groups, except RW. RW in the control group was statistically lower than the test group at all follow-up periods. CONCLUSION: Treatment of recession with CTG or a CTG-PRP combination resulted in favourable clinical outcomes. However, no difference could be found between CTG and CTG+PRP. Whether much longer follow-up studies with higher statistical power may change these results remains questionable.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) was speculated to be a promoter of periodontal regeneration. There are only a few clinical comparative studies using PRP in the treatment of gingival recession. AIM: The aim of the present study was to compare connective tissue graft (CTG)+PRP with CTG alone in the treatment of gingival recession. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty patients with Miller I/II recessions were included. Each recession was randomly treated with either CTG+PRP or CTG. Clinical variables were recorded at baseline and at 6 weeks, 6 and 12 months. Root coverage (RC) and attachment gain (AG) were also calculated. RESULTS: Probing depth, recession depth, clinical attachment level, keratinized tissue width and recession width (RW) were improved in both study groups. However, no difference was observed between groups, except RW. RW in the control group was statistically lower than the test group at all follow-up periods. CONCLUSION: Treatment of recession with CTG or a CTG-PRP combination resulted in favourable clinical outcomes. However, no difference could be found between CTG and CTG+PRP. Whether much longer follow-up studies with higher statistical power may change these results remains questionable.