View clinical trials related to Gingival Recession.
Filter by:Clinical evaluation of conventional and modified coronally advanced flaps combined with acellular dermal matrix graft
This study evaluated the effect of topical hyaluronic acid (HA) application on free gingival graft (FGG) donor and recipient sites during the early wound healing period with laser Doppler flowmetry (LDF) and to investigate the effect of HA application on the dimensional change of the graft.Participants were randomly classified into the test group (TG) and control group (CG). HA was applied to both donor and recipient sites in 20 patients who formed the TG, whereas HA was not applied to the 20 patients who formed the CG.
This studies evaluate the efficacy of the coronally advanced flap (CAF) with or without connective tissue graft (CTG) for the treatment of single maxillary recession associated to non carious cervical lesion (NCCL).
The present CONSORT-based randomized clinical trial is to assess the adjunctive benefit of a xenogenic collagen matrix in combination with a coronal advanced flap with respect to a coronal advanced flap alone in the treatment of multiple gingival recession defects in adult population.
Following tooth loss, a considerable reduction in hard- and soft-tissue volume can be expected (Tan WL, et al., 2012), (AraujoMG, et al., 2015). In the anterior maxilla, tissue loss can make future implant restorations more challenging and less predictable in terms of achieving and maintaining favorable soft-tissue-emergence profiles. Even with careful implant planning and placement, marginal gingival recession of 0.5-1 mm has been a common finding with single-tooth implants (Nisapakultorn K, et al., 2010), (Suphanantachat S, et al., 2012). This is partly attributed to bone remodeling after implant surgery, and occurs regardless of implant-placement protocol used (Hof M, et al., 2015).
This study aims to assess the effect of tunneling technique with subepithelial connective tissue graft versus tunneling technique with laterally closed tunnel in treatment of recession type 2 defect.Few randomized clinical trial has been involved with recession type 2 defects treated with tunneling technique and coronal advanced flap.
Management of Miller class I & II gingival recession using coronally advanced flap combined with conventional de-epithelialized free gingival graft versus coronally advanced flap combined with abrasive de-epithelized connective tissue graft Null hypothesis: In patients with Miller class I and II gingival recession, there is no difference between coronally advanced flap with conventional de-epithelialized free gingival graft and coronally advanced flap with abrasive de-epithelized connective tissue graft in recession depth reduction.
This clinical study consists on taking 2 different records of the upper and lower incisors area : 1) a perpendicular x-ray and 2) an ultrasonic measurement of gingival thickness on the labial plate. Both measurements are used in order to measure gingival and bone thickness. The aim was to verify the reliability of the tissue measurements of an ultrasonic technique compared with the radiographic technique and to verify whether the biotype has correlation between the maxillary and mandibular biotype in the same patient.
Platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) and Autologous Fibrin Glue (AFG) are fibrin preparation derived from human blood samples and are used in regenerative dentistry. Aim: The aim of this study is to evaluate the level of root coverage using PRF (+) AFG with a coronally advanced flap (CAF) or PRF only with a CAF compared to a sub-epithelial connective tissue graft (CTG) with a CAF for treating Class 1 and 2 gingival recession defects. Additionally, to evaluate the level of keratinized tissue tissue thickness and width using PRF (+) AFG with a CAF or PRF only with a CAF compared to CTG with CAF for Class 1 and 2 gingival recession defects. Method: 48 patients with recession defects will be randomly divided into three different treatment groups. Treatment Group A (n=16) will consist of patients treated with PRF (+) AFG with a CAF, Group B (n=16) will consist of patients treated with PRF only with a CAF and Group C (n=16) will consits of patients treated with CTG with CAF as a control. Clinical measurements will be assessed at baseline and at 1 month and 6 months after the surgery. The clinical measurements that will be recorded, include probing depth, clinical attachment level, and gingval recession parameters. The gingival recession parameters include recession width, depth and thickness.
Postoperative pain as well as bleeding are the most common complications after palatal graft harvesting also postsurgical swelling have been reported , Although different agents were used to protect the denuded areas on the palate as gelatin sponge , platelet rich fibrin (PRF) , medicinal plant extract (MPE) and platelet concentrate , no gold standard can be specified for this purpose PICO Format: P: Patients with mucogingival defects that require free gingival graft. I:1. Hyaluronic acid gel 0.2% placed in the palatal donor site then covered with periodontal pack (test group I) 2.MEBO ointment placed in the palatal donor site then covered with periodontal pack (test group II) C: Periodontal pack only O: Post-operative pain T: day 3, 7, 14, 21 and 42 postoperative. Aim of the study: To compare the effect of MEBO ointment versus Hyaluronic acid gel 0.2% applied to palatal donor site in post-operative pain reduction after free gingival graft harvesting. Research question: Is MEBO ointment as effective as hyaluronic acid gel in the management of postoperative pain after free gingival graft harvesting in the management of mucogingival defects?