Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Modified coronally advanced tunnel versus epithelialized free gingival graft technique in gingival phenotype modification: a comparative randomized controlled clinical trial
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Modified coronally advanced tunnel versus epithelialized free gingival graft technique in gingival phenotype modification: a comparative randomized controlled clinical trial
Do you wish to request the book?
Modified coronally advanced tunnel versus epithelialized free gingival graft technique in gingival phenotype modification: a comparative randomized controlled clinical trial
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Modified coronally advanced tunnel versus epithelialized free gingival graft technique in gingival phenotype modification: a comparative randomized controlled clinical trial
2022
Overview
ObjectivesThe gingival thickness (GT) and keratinized tissue (KT) height are defined as the gingival phenotype. Both the modified coronally advanced tunnel technique (MCAT) and free gingival grafts (FGG) are used in modifying the gingival phenotype. This study aims to compare MCAT and FGG in gingival phenotype modification.Materials and methodsOne hundred and forty recessions in 50 patients with thin and insufficient keratinized tissue at the anterior mandible were treated with either MCAT or FGG. GT, KT height, recession depth, recession width, probing depth, and clinical attachment level were evaluated at baseline and 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months. GT change, KT change, root coverage (RC), clinical attachment gain, and complete root coverage (CRC) were calculated. The wound healing index, tissue appearance, patient expectations, aesthetic, and dentin hypersensitivity were assessed at baseline and 6 months.ResultsAll periodontal variables showed significant change from baseline to 12 months in both groups (p < 0.05). While FGG resulted in more KT change (p < 0.001), all MCAT sites showed at least 2 mm KT change in 12 months. MCAT resulted in greater GT change (p < 0.05) and RC (p < 0.003). In contrast, there was no significant inter-group CRC difference (p = 0.523). All patient-based variables were favorable to MCAT (p < 0.05), except dentin hypersensitivity (p = 0.225).ConclusionsBoth techniques were successful in terms of gingival phenotype modification in the anterior mandible. Additional GT increase, RC, and patient-based outcomes favored MCAT, though KT change proved greater with FGG.Clinical relevanceClinicians may choose MCAT for higher GT increase whereas FGG for more KTC.Trial registration number: NCT04690140 and date: 12/26/2020.
Publisher
Springer Nature B.V
Subject
