TY - JOUR
T1 - Randomized controlled clinical trial evaluating connective tissue graft plus resin-modified glass ionomer restoration for the treatment of gingival recession associated with non-carious cervical lesion
T2 - 2-year follow-up
AU - Santamaria, Mauro Pedrine
AU - Da Silva Feitosa, Daniela
AU - Casati, Marcio Zaffalon
AU - Nociti, Francisco Humberto
AU - Sallum, Antônio Wilson
AU - Sallum, Enilson Antônio
PY - 2013/9
Y1 - 2013/9
N2 - Background: The aim of this clinical study is to evaluate the 2-year term results of gingival recession (GR) associated with non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) treated by connective tissue graft (CTG) alone or in combination with a resin-modified glass ionomer restoration (CTG+R). Methods: Thirty-six patients with Miller Class I buccal GR associated with NCCLs completed the follow-up. The defects were randomly assigned to receive either CTG or CTG+R. Bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), relative GR, clinical attachment level (CAL), and cervical lesion height coverage were measured at baseline, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after treatment. Results: Both groups showed statistically significant gains in CAL and soft-tissue coverage. The differences between groups were not statistically significant in BOP, PD, relative GR, or CAL after 2 years. Cervical lesion height coverage was 79.31% ± 18.51% for CTG and 71.95% ± 13.25% for CTG+R (P >0.05). Estimated root coverage was 91.56% ± 11.74% for CTG and 93.29% ± 7.97% for CTG+R (P ≥0.05). Conclusions: Within the limits of the present study, it can be concluded that both procedures provide comparable soft tissue coverage after 2 years of follow-up.
AB - Background: The aim of this clinical study is to evaluate the 2-year term results of gingival recession (GR) associated with non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) treated by connective tissue graft (CTG) alone or in combination with a resin-modified glass ionomer restoration (CTG+R). Methods: Thirty-six patients with Miller Class I buccal GR associated with NCCLs completed the follow-up. The defects were randomly assigned to receive either CTG or CTG+R. Bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), relative GR, clinical attachment level (CAL), and cervical lesion height coverage were measured at baseline, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after treatment. Results: Both groups showed statistically significant gains in CAL and soft-tissue coverage. The differences between groups were not statistically significant in BOP, PD, relative GR, or CAL after 2 years. Cervical lesion height coverage was 79.31% ± 18.51% for CTG and 71.95% ± 13.25% for CTG+R (P >0.05). Estimated root coverage was 91.56% ± 11.74% for CTG and 93.29% ± 7.97% for CTG+R (P ≥0.05). Conclusions: Within the limits of the present study, it can be concluded that both procedures provide comparable soft tissue coverage after 2 years of follow-up.
KW - Dental esthetics
KW - Dental restoration
KW - Gingival recession
KW - Glass ionomer cements
KW - Permanent
KW - Tooth abrasion
KW - Tooth cervix
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84883426953&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84883426953&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1902/jop.2013.120447
DO - 10.1902/jop.2013.120447
M3 - Article
C2 - 23368948
AN - SCOPUS:84883426953
SN - 0022-3492
VL - 84
SP - e1-e8
JO - Journal of Periodontology
JF - Journal of Periodontology
IS - 9
ER -