Last reviewed · How we verify
A Clinical Comparison of Microsurgical Versus Conventional Surgical Approaches for the Semilunar Coronally Advanced Flap
BACKGROUND: The semilunar coronally repositioned flap (SLCRF) has been used for the treatment of recession defects (GR). Recently a microsusgical (MICRO) has been successfully employed with the procedure apparently resulting in improved results, however, no previous controlled clinical study has evaluated the MICRO SLCRF in comparison with SLCRF performed as originally described (MACRO). The objective of the present study was to compare the clinical outcomes of the MICRO and MACRO SLCRF in the treatment of human GR. METHODS: Fourteen patients, with bilateral Miller class I GR defects were randomly assigned to MICRO or MACRO SLCRF. Clinical parameters, assessed at baseline and 6 months later, included recession height (RECH), recession width (RECW), width of keratinized tissue (WKT), probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), pain measurements and esthetic evaluation with the Root Coverage Score (RCS). Inter-measurements differences were analyzed with a Chi-square or a paired t-test, with significance set at α\<0.05.
Details
| Lead sponsor | Universidade Federal Fluminense |
|---|---|
| Phase | Phase 4 |
| Status | COMPLETED |
| Enrolment | 14 |
| Start date | 2010-10 |
| Completion | 2012-04 |
Conditions
- Gingival Recession
Interventions
- MICROSURGERY
- MACROSURGERY
- Dexamethasone
- Chlorhexidine gluconate
- 2.0% Mepivacaine + 1:100.000 epinephrine
Primary outcomes
- Root coverage — 6 months
Distance between the cementum-enamel junction and the gingival margin. Measurements will be performed at baseline (RECH1) and after 6 months (RECH2). The amount of root coverage will be calculated as REC2x100/REC1