Debora Franceschi

Does placement of a connective tissue graft improve the outcomes of coronally advanced flap for coverage of single gingival recessions in upper anterior teeth? A multi‐centre, randomized, double‐blind, clinical trial

AIMS This parallel-group, multi-centre, double-blind, randomized-controlled clinical trial was undertaken to compare the clinical outcomes and patient morbidity of coronally advanced flap (CAF) alone or in combination with a connective tissue graft (CAF+CTG) in single Miller Class I and II gingival recessions. MATERIAL AND METHODS Three centres enrolled 85 patients with one recession each. Surgery was performed elevating a pedicle flap; 42 sites randomly received a graft under the flap. Measurements were taken by blind and calibrated examiners. Outcome measures included recession reduction, complete root coverage (CRC), intra-operative and post-operative morbidity, dentine sensitivity, and side effects. RESULTS No differences were noted in the intra-operative and post-operative patient-related variables between the two groups. Surgical time was significantly shorter in the CAF group. Recession reduction was not statistically different between the two groups, even though a model showed a tendency towards improved outcomes in sites treated with CAF+CTG (adjusted difference 0.33 mm, 95% CI=-0.06 to 0.72, p=0.1002). Significantly greater probability of CRC was observed after CAF+CTG (adjusted OR=5.09, 95% CI=1.69-17.57, p=0.0033). Dentine hypersensitivity improved in both the groups. CONCLUSIONS Both treatments were effective in providing a significant reduction of the baseline recession and dentine hypersensitivity, with only limited intra-operative and post-operative morbidity and side effects. Adjunctive application of a CTG under a CAF increased the probability of achieving CRC in maxillary Miller Class I and II defects.

Coronally advanced flap versus connective tissue graft in the treatment of multiple gingival recessions: a split‐mouth study with a 5‐year follow‐up

AIM The aim of this long-term study was to compare the clinical outcomes of coronally advanced flap (CAF) alone versus coronally advanced flap plus connective tissue graft (CAF+CTG) in the treatment of multiple gingival recessions using a split-mouth design over 5 years of follow-up. MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 13 patients (mean age 31.4 years) showing multiple bilateral gingival recessions were treated. On one side, CAF+CTG was used, while in the contra-lateral side, a CAF alone was applied. Clinical outcomes were evaluated at the 6-month, 1-year and 5-year follow-ups. RESULTS A total of 93 Miller class I, II and III gingival recessions were treated. In the CAF+CTG-treated sites, the baseline gingival recession was 3.6 +/- 1.3 mm, while in the CAF-treated sites, it was 2.9 +/- 1.3 mm (p=0.0034). No difference in terms of the number of sites with complete root coverage (CRC) was reported (OR=0.49, p=0.1772) at the 6-month follow-up. At the 5-year follow-up, CAF+CTG-treated sites showed a higher percentage of sites with CRC (52%) than CAF-treated sites (35%) (OR=3.94; p=0.0239). An apical relapse of the gingival margin in CAF-treated sites was observed while a coronal improvement of the margin was noted in CAF+CTG-treated sites between the 6-month and the 5-year follow-ups. CONCLUSIONS CAF+CTG provided better CRC than CAF alone in the treatment of multiple gingival recessions at the 5-year follow-up.

Lack of adjunctive benefit of Er:YAG laser in non-surgical periodontal treatment: a randomized split-mouth clinical trial

AIM This split-mouth, randomized, clinical trial aimed to evaluate the efficacy of erbium-doped:yttrium-aluminium-garnet (Er:YAG) laser application in non-surgical periodontal treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 27 patients underwent four modalities of non-surgical therapy: supragingival debridement; scaling and root planing (SRP)+Er:YAG laser; Er:YAG laser; and SRP. Each strategy was randomly assigned and performed in one of the four quadrants. Clinical outcomes were evaluated at 3 and 6 months. Subjective benefits of patients have been evaluated by means of questionnaires. RESULTS Six months after therapy, Er:YAG laser showed no statistical difference in clinical attachment gain with respect to supragingival scaling [0.15 mm (95% CI -0.16; 0.46)], while SRP showed a greater attachment gain than the supragingival scaling [0.37 mm (95% CI 0.05; 0.68)]. No difference resulted between Er:YAG laser+SRP and SRP alone [0.05 mm (95% CI -0.25; 0.36)]. CONCLUSIONS The adjunctive use of Er:YAG laser to conventional SRP did not reveal a more effective result than SRP alone. Furthermore, the sites treated with Er:YAG laser showed similar results of the sites treated with supragingival scaling.

Classification of dental surface defects in areas of gingival recession.

BACKGROUND A clinical classification of surface defects in gingival recession area is proposed. METHODS Two factors were evaluated to set up a classification system: presence (A) or absence (B) of cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) and presence (+) or absence (-) of dental surface discrepancy caused by abrasion (step). Four classes (A+, A-, B+, and B-) were identified on the basis of these variables. To validate the classification three different calibrated examiners applied the proposed classification system to 46 gingival recessions and kappa statistics were performed. The classification was used on 1,010 gingival recessions from 353 patients to examine the distribution of the four classes. RESULTS The kappa statistics for intrarater agreement ranged from 0.74 to 0.95 (almost perfect agreement), whereas interrater agreement ranged from 0.26 to 0.59 (moderate agreement). Out of 1,010 exposed root surfaces associated with gingival recession, 144 showed an identifiable CEJ associated with a root surface defect (Class A+, 14%); 469 an identifiable CEJ without any associated step (Class A-, 46%); 244 an unidentifiable CEJ with a step (Class B+, 24%); and 153 an unidentifiable CEJ without any associated step (Class B-, 15%). CONCLUSION The proposed classification describes the dental surface defects that are of paramount importance in diagnosing gingival recession areas.

Fourteen-year outcomes of coronally advanced flap for root coverage: follow-up from a randomized trial

TRIAL DESIGN This long-term 14-year-randomized split-mouth study aimed at evaluating (1) the outcomes of two different methods of root surface modifications (root surface polishing versus root planing) used in combination with a coronally advanced flap (CAF) and (2) the long-term results of CAF performed for the treatment of single gingival recessions. METHODS Ten patients with similar bilateral recessions ≥2 mm were selected for a split-mouth randomized design study. Exposed root surfaces were assigned to receive polishing (test sites) or root planing (control sites). A multilevel model was used to analyse data at 3 months, 1, 5 and 14 years. RESULTS One patient dropped out after 1 year. At 14 years, recession depth (Rec) was 0.9 (1.2) mm for the test sites and 0.9 (0.9) mm for the control sites. The interaction between treatment and keratinized tissue was significant (p=0.0035). Rec increased slightly over time (p=0.0006) in both the groups. CONCLUSIONS This study shows that during a long-term follow-up, gingival recession recurred in 39% of the treated sites following the CAF procedure.

Long-Term 8-Year Outcomes of Coronally Advanced Flap for Root Coverage

BACKGROUND This long-term 8-year case series study aims at evaluating the results of the outcomes of coronally advanced flap (CAF) procedures performed for the treatment of single gingival recessions (GRs). METHODS Sixty patients with single maxillary GRs ≥ 2 mm, without loss of interproximal soft and hard tissue, treated with the CAF procedure and evaluated at 6 months in a previously published article, were followed for 8 years. Complete root coverage, recession reduction, and amount of keratinized tissue (KT) were analyzed using descriptive statistics, the paired t test, McNemar test, and a general linear model. RESULTS Three patients dropped out during the course of 8 years. Recession reduction from baseline to 8 years was 2.3 ± 1.1 mm; P <0.0001, whereas GRs increased in 53% of the sites from 6 months to 8 years (0.5 ± 0.7 mm; P <0.0001). The percentage of sites with complete root coverage decreased from 55% at 6 months to 35% at 8 years (P = 0.0047). The amount of KT tended to decrease from baseline to 8 years (0.6 ± 0.8 mm; P <0.0001). The general linear model shows that recession reduction is associated with both baseline recession depth and with the amount of initial KT. Sex, age, and smoking are not associated with recession reduction at 8 years. CONCLUSIONS The CAF procedure is effective in the treatment of GRs However, recession relapse and reduction of KT occurred during the follow-up period. The baseline width of KT is a predictive factor for recession reduction when using the CAF technique.