Active clinical trials for "Gingival Recession"

In this study, the conventional SDG method applied to increase the adherent gingival band and partial de-epithelialized SDG methods were evaluated in terms of aesthetics and color compatibility of the recipient area with adjacent tissues. This study is a controlled double-blind clinical trial randomized by split-mouth, envelope method.Clinical parameters and aesthetic harmony were compared at postoperative 1st, 3rd and 6th months after surgical procedures.Color harmony evaluation was made in 2 different ways, both by photo analysis of a blind researcher using computer software and by visual evaluation of the same blind researcher.

The aim of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes of root coverage procedures, using coronally advanced flap in combination with acellular dermal matrix with or without enamel matrix derivatives .

Prospective, randomized, within subjects-controlled design

This randomized controlled clinical study aimed to evaluate the success of the combination of tunnel technique and concentrated growth factor membrane for root coverage in treating multiple gingival recessions and compare with the gold standard connective tissue graft.

evaluation of the use of L-PRF membrane with coronally repositioned flap in treatment of localized gingival recession (Class I & II) in comparison with the use of connective tissue graft

Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the root coverage and aesthetic results of CAF+ CTG positioned apical to the CEJ (CAF+CTG-ACEJ) with CAF+CTG positioned on the CEJ (CAF+CTG-CEJ) for treating isolated gingival recession defects. Methods: Thirthy-eight patients with Miller class I and II gingival recessions were enrolled. 19 patients were randomly assigned to the CAF+CTG-ACEJ group or CAF+CTG-CEJ group. Clinical and aesthetical evaluations were made at 6 months.

Many studies have compared the tunnel technique and coronally advanced flap in the treatment of single and multiple recessions. However, there is a lack of evidence that compared both techniques in combination with a connective tissue graft, for just multiple adjacent recessions. No technique is clearly superior to another in terms of complete root coverage (CRC), mean root coverage (MRC) and the gain of keratinized tissue height (KTH) when multiple recession coverage was evaluated. Moreover, as a connective tissue graft supposed to offer more stability in terms of complete root coverage in long-term basis, the main question should be aimed at the role of the sub-epithelial connective tissue graft, when it is used in combination with one technique or another. Hence, the hypothesis is focused on if the use of a connective tissue graft in combination with a tunnel technique would provide higher clinical outcomes and similar patient-based outcomes than its use in combination with the Coronally Advanced flap technique.

In this comparative trial, 50 patients with shallow vestibules and Type 1/2 recessions will be treated with either a vertically coronally advanced flap + connective tissue graft or a free gingival graft. At baseline, 3rd-month, 6th-month, and 12th-month visits, the following parameters will be evaluated: buccal vestibular depth, keratinized tissue height, gingival thickness, recession depth, recession width, probing depth, and clinical attachment level. Keratinized tissue change, gingival thickness change, root coverage, clinical attachment gain, and complete root coverage will be calculated. The wound healing index, tissue appearance, patient expectations, aesthetics, and dentin hypersensitivity will be assessed at baseline and at the 6th week.

Compare between Buccal fat pad and subepithelial connective tissue graft in treatment of localized recession. Primary objective: to evaluate root coverage in terms of gingival thickness and esthetic. Secondary objective: to evaluate patient satisfaction and postoperative pain.

Gingival recessions are often successfully treated by coronally advanced flap technique (CAF) associated with subepithelial connective tissue grafts (SCTG). Currently the xenogeneic collagen matrix (CM) has been used as a substitute for SCTG associated with CAF technique for root coverage. CAF technique was not developed for use with CM and has shown limited results when applied to the CM. The aim of this study was to compare and show the benefits of the extended flap technique (EFT) compared to CAF technique using CM for root coverage.