View clinical trials related to Gingival Recession, Generalized.
Filter by:Twenty patients seeking treatment for gingival recession coverage, ranging from 20-70 years of age with multiple Miller Class I or II buccal gingival recessions (depth≥3 mm, at least 3 adjacent teeth) will be recruited for this study. Five patients within the study patient pool looking for further orthodontic or restorative treatment that requires removal of one single rooted tooth within the study site of interest will be selected for histological sample removal. All procedures performed in this study will be executed according to established routine protocols, with the exception of block biopsies of one hopeless tooth per patient (total of 5 patients) at 6 months.
The primary aim of this study is to evaluate whether the use of a xenogenic collagen matrix (XCM) for the treatment of multiple adjacent gingival recessions (MAGRs) with a multiple coronally advanced flap technique (mCAF) achieves better results than the use of an autologous connective tissue graft (CTG) in terms of recession reduction (primary outcome) and other secondary root coverage outcomes (e.g. complete root coverage, mean root coverage). Moreover, this study aims to compare secondary clinical variables (e.g. keratinized tissue width (KTW) changes, probing pocket depth (PPD) changes, volumetric gain (VG), etc.), also with a digital approach, the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs e.g. pain, swelling, bleeding). The hypothesis of this study is that at 6 months and 1 year follow-up the mCAF with XCM is not inferior to CTG in terms of recessions reduction and secondary clinical variables, and superior regarding to PROMs.
The primary aim of this study is to evaluate whether the effect of HA in combination with XCM for the treatment of MAGRs with a multiple coronally advanced flap technique (mCAF) achieves better results than the XCM with mCAF alone in terms of recession reduction (primary outcome) and other secondary root coverage outcomes (e.g. complete root coverage, mean root coverage). Moreover, this study aims to compare secondary clinical variables (e.g. keratinized tissue width (KTW) changes, probing pocket depth (PPD) changes, volumetric gain (VG), etc.), also with a digital approach, the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs e.g. pain, swelling, bleeding) and lastly the expression of molecular mediators of tissue healing/regeneration. The hypothesis of this study is that at 6 months and 1 year follow-up the mCAF with XCM+HA is superior to the mCAF with only XCM in terms of recessions reduction and secondary clinical variables, including PROMs.
This split-mouth randomized clinical trial compared two different types of subepithelial connective tissue grafts (SCTG) considering clinical parameters and patient-centered outcomes in patients with bilateral RT 1 multiple gingival recessions after 6 months postoperatively. 21 patients with 84 sites were surgically treated with coronally advanced flap (CAF) associated with SCTG harvested by: double blade scalpel (DBS) and de-epithelized (DE) SCTG. Periodontal clinical parameters and aesthetics were evaluated by a calibrated periodontist at baseline and after 6 months. Patient-centered outcomes related to pain/discomfort and aesthetics were assessed with Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) after 7 days and 6 months, respectively. Gingival blood flows were analyzed by Laser Doppler flowmetry (FLD) at baseline and 2, 7 and 14 days postoperatively.
The study team proposes to prospectively compare the healing outcomes of autogenous soft tissue connective tissue graft (CTG) and Acellular dermis matrix (ADM) in a split-mouth design study for patients requiring modification of gingival soft tissue biotype. The researchers aim to investigate the earlier phase of graft healing after the grafting surgery by biopsy histology and by examining the alteration of gene profile during the healing of gingival tissue healing by molecular cell biological techniques.
Clinical evaluation of conventional and modified coronally advanced flaps combined with acellular dermal matrix graft
The gold standard for gingival recession treatment is the coronal repositioning of the flap associated with the subepithelial connective tissue graft. The porcine collagen matrix (PCR) has been used as a substitute for subepithelial connective tissue graft in periodontal plastic surgery and has achieved similar results. The PCR use has the advantage of avoiding possible pre and postoperative complications , as well as overcome the limitations presented by autograft . The different surgical techniques used for root coverage seek predictability and success . For this, besides the type of incision placements flap and graft are the most important because the healing benefits and outcome . The aim of this study is to compare two surgical techniques for root coverage and evaluate which one provides better clinical outcomes and less morbidity . 20 adults , nonsmoking patients , showing multiple bilateral gingival recessions , class I or II Miller located in canine, first and second premolars are selected. Both techniques use the PCR as a graft . However, in one Quadrant partial flap will be held together with relaxing incisions through an intrasulcular incision, PCR will be positioned 1 mm apical to the cementoenamel junction (CEJ) and the flap will be positioned 1 mm coronal CEJ. In the opposite quadrant periosteal envelope that does not use relaxing incisions, avoiding any scars, will be performed with the PCR. The clinical parameters (gingival recession height and width, keratinized tissue thickness and width) will be evaluated 2 weeks after basic periodontal therapy and after 6 and 12 months to surgical procedures..
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of two different treatment agents used in conjunction with subepithelial connective graft technique on root coverage outcomes in multiple recession defects. Half of patients will receive root treatment with antimicrobial photodynamic therapy and the other half will receive photobiomodulation therapy by laser on surgery site.
Subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) is considered the gold standard for root coverage treatment. However, it is associated with postoperative morbidity, limited amount of donor tissue, and longer surgical time. Thus, the search for a tissue substitute for SCTG is increasing. Currently, one of the possible autogenous soft tissue substitutes found in the market is the Mucograft® xenogeneic matrix (CM). The results with the use of MC are very promising, both for root coverage as well as for the gain of keratinized tissue. The present study consists of a parallel randomized clinical trial to compare SCTG (control group) and CM (test group) in the treatment of Miller's class I and II gingival recessions, multiple in aesthetic areas (upper central incisors, Lateral and canine).
Subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) is considered the gold standard treatment for root coverage in Miller Class I and II single gingival recession. Therefore, scientific evidence is limited for multiple gingival recessions, only with extrapolation from single-tooth data. Depending on area and depth during the removal of the graft from palate, connective tissue presents different anatomic characteristics, geometric shapes and histological composition. Possibly different types of SCTGs present distinct volumetric stability and physiological process of revascularization. This randomized, split-mouth, double blind clinical trial aim to evaluate periodontal parameters (complete root coverage, gingival recession depth and width, gingival thickness, width of keratinized tissue, probing depth, clinical attachment, plaque and bleeding index) and gingival blood flow in recipient sites, comparing sites that received SCTG from palatal area with predominance of lamina propria and predominance of submucosa. Clinical measurements will be evaluated at baseline and 3, 6 and 12 months after surgical procedure. Blood flow flowmetry with laser doppler (LDF) will be analyzed at baseline and 3, 7,14 and 28 days after surgery. Participants will be invited to answer a questionnaire of aesthetic satisfaction and symptoms of pain and discomfort. Two experienced periodontists blind to experimental groups will be invited to observe the clinical outcomes and answer an aesthetic questionnaire. Data analysis will be performed by paired t-test if follow normal distribution or Wilcoxon if follow nonnormal distribution with significance level of 5% (p <0.05).