Long-term comparison of root coverage procedures at single RT2 maxillary gingival recessions: Ten-year extension results from a randomized, controlled clinical trial.

AIM: The purpose of the present study was to assess root coverage outcomes 10 years after connective tissue graft plus coronally advanced flap (CTG + CAF) or CAF alone, at single RT2 maxillary gingival recession. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-one of the original 29 patients (11 treated with CAF + CTG and 10 with CAF alone) were available for the 10-year follow-up. A blinded and calibrated examiner performed all the measurements. Outcome measures included complete root coverage (CRC), recession reduction (RecRed), root coverage aesthetic score (RES), and keratinized tissue (KT) gain. A visual analogue scale was used to evaluate patient satisfaction. RESULTS: CRC was maintained in 63% of the test group and 20% of the control group after 10 years, with a significant difference favouring CAF + CTG (p = .030). Furthermore, the addition of CTG was associated with greater KT gain (p = .0002) and greater papilla tip recession (p = .023) than with CAF at the last follow-up. No difference was detected regarding RecRed, RES, and patient satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Adding CTG under CAF improved the probability of maintaining complete root coverage 10 years after single maxillary RT2 recession treatment.

Stability of root coverage outcomes at single maxillary gingival recession with loss of interdental attachment: 3-year extension results from a randomized, controlled, clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the stability of root coverage outcomes 3 years after Connective Tissue Graft (CTG) plus Coronally Advanced Flap (CAF) or CAF alone at single maxillary gingival recession with minimal inter-dental clinical attachment loss. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-four of the original 29 patients, 13 treated with CAF + CTG and 11 with CAF, were available for the 3-year follow-up. Measurements were performed by a blind and calibrated examiner. Outcome measures included complete root coverage (CRC), recession reduction (RecRed), Root coverage Esthetic Score (RES) and Keratinized Tissue (KT) Gain. Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was used to evaluate patient satisfaction. RESULTS: After 3 years, CAF + CTG resulted in better outcomes in terms of CRC (p = 0.0054) than CAF alone. No difference was detected in terms of RecRed, RES score and VAS values. Furthermore, CAF + CTG was associated with higher KT gain than CAF at the last follow-up (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Root coverage outcomes in single gingival recession with inter-dental CAL loss are stable after 3 years. The application of CTG under CAF was associated with increased probability to obtain CRC than CAF alone at the final follow-up.

Soft-tissue re-growth following fibre retention osseous resective surgery or osseous resective surgery: a multilevel analysis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess soft-tissue re-growth following Fibre Retention Osseous Resective Surgery (FibReORS) or Osseous Resective Surgery (ORS) over a 12-month healing period. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty patients with chronic periodontitis showing persistent periodontal pockets at posterior natural teeth after cause-related therapy were enroled. Periodontal pockets were associated with infrabony defect ≤3 mm; 15 patients were randomly assigned to FibReORS (test group) and 15 to ORS (control group). Measurements were performed by a blind and calibrated examiner. Soft-tissue rebound after flap suture was monitored by changes in gingival recession at 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12- month follow-up. Multilevel analysis considering patient, site, and time levels was performed. RESULTS: Greater osseous resection during surgery and higher post surgical gingival recession was observed in the ORS group. The mean amount of soft-tissue rebound following surgery was 2.5 mm for ORS-treated sites and 2.2 mm for FibReORS-treated sites. Approximately 90% of the coronal re-growth was detectable after 6 months for both procedures. The interaction between ORS and time of observation showed a higher soft-tissue rebound after 12 months (p = 0.0233) for ORS-treated sites. CONCLUSIONS: Both procedures showed a similar coronal soft-tissue re-growth with a significant higher recession reduction for ORS-treated sites. Significant clinical stability of the gingival margin is obtained 6 months after surgery for both procedures.

Benefits of fibre retention osseous resective surgery in the treatment of shallow infrabony defects: a double-blind, randomized, clinical trial describing clinical, radiographic and patient-reported outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this randomized clinical trial was to evaluate the efficacy of Apically Positioned Flap with Fibre Retention Osseous Resective Surgery (FibReORS) or Osseous Resective Surgery (ORS) to treat periodontal pockets associated with infrabony defect ≤3 mm at posterior natural teeth. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty patients with chronic periodontitis showing persistent periodontal pockets after cause-related therapy were enrolled; 15 patients were randomly assigned to FibReORS (test group) and 15 to ORS (control group). Measurements were performed by a blind and calibrated examiner. Outcome measures included intra-operative and post-operative morbidity and root sensitivity, 1-year probing depth (PD), gingival recession (Rec) and radiographic bone changes. RESULTS: No differences in clinical and bone defect parameters were observed at baseline. Marginal bone resection was reduced by 0.9-1.6 mm in the FibReORS group. ORS was associated with patient perception of greater surgical hardship (p = 0.0264), higher 1-week pain experience (p = 0.0001) and greater dental hypersensitivity (p = 0.0002). After 1 year, shallow, maintainable PD with no difference between the two procedures (p = 0.3707) was obtained. FibReORS was associated with less final Rec (p < 0.0001) and less radiographic bone loss (p < 0.0001) than ORS. Dental hypersensitivity remained significantly higher in the ORS group (p = 0.0024). CONCLUSION: FibReORS was similarly effective as ORS for PD reduction with less final Rec and patient morbidity.

Coronally advanced flap with and without connective tissue graft for the treatment of single maxillary gingival recession with loss of inter-dental attachment. A randomized controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this randomized clinical trial (RCT) was to evaluate the adjunctive benefit of Connective Tissue Graft (CTG) to Coronally Advanced Flap (CAF) for the treatment of gingival recession associated with inter-dental clinical attachment loss equal or smaller to the buccal attachment loss (RT2). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 29 patients with one recession were enrolled; 15 patients were randomly assigned to CAF+CTG while 14 to CAF alone. Measurements were performed by a blind and calibrated examiner. Outcome measures included complete root coverage (CRC), recession reduction (RecRed), Root coverage Esthetic Score (RES), intra-operative and post-operative morbidity, and root sensitivity. RESULTS: After 6 months, CAF+CTG resulted in better outcomes in terms of CRC (adjusted OR = 15.51, p = 0.0325) than CAF alone. CRC was observed in >80% of the cases treated with CAF+CTG when the baseline amount of inter-dental CAL was ≤ 3 mm. No difference was detected in term of RecRed. CAF+CTG was associated with longer surgical-time (p < 0.0001), higher number of days with post-operative morbidity (p = 0.0222) and the need for a greater number of analgesics (p = 0.0178) than CAF alone. No difference for final RES score was detected (p = 0.1612). CONCLUSION: Both treatments can provide CRC in single gingival recession with inter-dental CAL loss. The application of CTG under CAF resulted in predictable CRC when inter-dental CAL was ≤ 3 mm.

The interproximal clinical attachment level to classify gingival recessions and predict root coverage outcomes: an explorative and reliability study.

BACKGROUND: The aims of this study were (i) to test the reliability of a new classification system of gingival recessions using the level of interproximal clinical attachment as an identification criterion and (ii) to explore the predictive value of the resulting classification system on the final root coverage outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients showing at least one buccal gingival recession were recruited by one operator. Three recession types (RT) were identified. While class RT1 included gingival recession with no loss of interproximal attachment, class RT2 recession was associated with interproximal attachment loss less than or equal to the buccal site and class RT3 showed higher interproximal attachment loss than the buccal site. The classification was tested by two examiners blinded to the data collected by the other examiner. Intra-rater and inter-rater agreement was assessed. Furthermore, the 6-month root coverage outcomes of consecutively treated gingival recessions were retrospectively evaluated in order to explore the predictive value of the proposed classification on the final recession reduction (Rec Red). RESULTS: The new classification system of gingival recessions was tested in a total of 116 gingival recessions (mean 3.2±1.2 mm) in 25 patients. The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) for inter-rater agreement was 0.86, showing an almost perfect agreement between the examiners. The RT classification was predictive of the final Rec Red (p<0.0001) at the 6-month follow-up in 109 treated gingival recessions. CONCLUSIONS: The evaluation of interproximal clinical attachment level may be used to classify gingival recession defects and to predict the final root coverage outcomes.

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.

Orthodontic treatment of periodontal defects. Part II: A systematic review on human and animal studies.

Several studies have been published focusing on the possibility to treat patients affected by periodontal defects by means of orthodontic treatment. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the efficacy of the orthodontic treatment applied to the therapy of infraosseous defects, gingival recessions, and furcation lesions. An electronic and a manual search were performed based on a PICO assessment worksheet. Both human and animal studies were selected for this review. The electronic search (from January 1966 to December 2009) and the hand search (from January 1988 to December 2009) were conducted by 3 independent reviewers. A total of 197 articles were found and only 29 were considered eligible for this review. In particular, 22 studies dealing with infrabony defects, 1 gingival recession, and 6 furcation defect treatments. Due to the weak evidence and the controversial and unclear results, it appears important to encourage the researchers to produce Randomized Controlled clinical Trials aimed to investigate the efficacy of the orthodontic treatment for the correction of periodontal defects.

Orthodontic treatment of periodontal defects. A systematic review.

Several studies have been published focusing on the possibility to treat patients affected by periodontal defects by means of orthodontic treatment. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the efficacy of the orthodontic treatment applied to the therapy of infraosseous defects, gingival recessions, and furcation lesions. To establish an appropriate search strategy, the PICO assessment worksheet was used. Only Randomized Controlled Trials and Systematic Reviews were selected for this review. The electronic search (from January 1966 to January 2008) and the hand search (from January 1988 to January 2008) were conducted by three independent reviewers. There were no language restriction. No Randomized Controlled Trials and Systematic Reviews were identified during the investigated period and therefore it was not possible to perform meta-analysis. It appears important to encourage the researchers to produce Randomized Controlled clinical Trials aimed to investigate the efficacy of the orthodontic treatment, alone or in combination with the periodontal therapy, for the resolution of periodontal defects.