Does vestibular incision improve the outcomes of vestibular incision subperiosteal tunnel technique: A randomized clinical trial for treatment of multiple adjacent type 1 gingival recession.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of vestibular incision subperiosteal tunnel technique (VISTA) and tunnel approach combined with connective tissue graft (CTG) for treatment of type 1 (RT1) multiple gingival recession. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-four patients with a total of 59 nonmolar recession teeth were randomly allocated to VISTA + CTG or Tunnel + CTG group. Recession depth and width, probing depth, clinical attachment level, width of keratinized tissue, gingival thickness, flap tension, mean root coverage (MRC), complete root coverage (CRC), patient-centered, and esthetic outcomes (root coverage esthetic scores, RES) were assessed at baseline and 12 months after surgery. RESULTS: At 12 months, MRC of 91.13 ± 16.96% and 91.40 ± 13.53%, CRC of 70.97% and 67.86% were observed for VISTA + CTG and Tunnel + CTG group respectively, with no significant difference between the two groups (p > 0.05). High RES of 8.52 ± 1.46 and 8.82 ± 1.44 was obtained in VISTA + CTG and Tunnel + CTG group respectively, without showing a significant difference (p = 0.245), while less scar formation was observed in Tunnel + CTG group (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Both procedures were effective for root coverage in RT1 multiple gingival recession at 12 months. Better esthetic result with less scar formation was obtained in tunnel approach combined with CTG without vestibular incision. (Registration number: ChiCTR-INR-16007845, registered on 19/12/2015, http://www.chictr.org.cn). CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: VISTA + CTG and Tunnel + CTG were both effective for root coverage in RT1 multiple gingival recession, with satisfying esthetic outcomes. However, it is suggested in critical esthetic areas, treatment options of making vertical incisions should be carefully considered.

Efficacy of periodontal minimally invasive surgery with and without regenerative materials for treatment of intrabony defect: a randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: The minimally invasive surgical technique was modified in suture (MISTms) in this study. The trial was to determine the efficacy of MISTms with and without regenerative materials for the treatment of intrabony defect and to identify factors influencing 1-year clinical attachment level (CAL) gain. METHODS: Thirty-six patients with interdental intrabony defects were randomly assigned to MISTms (MISTms alone, 18) or MISTms plus deproteinized bovine bone mineral and collagen membrane (MISTms combined, 18). Wound healing was evaluated by early healing index (EHI) at 1, 2, 3, and 6 weeks. Probing depth (PD), CAL, gingival recession, radiographic defect depth, and distance from the base of defect to the cementoenamel junction were recorded at baseline and 1 year postoperatively. A one-year composite outcome measure based on the combination of CAL gain and post-surgery PD was evaluated. Factors influencing 1-year CAL gain were analyzed. RESULTS: Fifteen patients in MISTms-alone and 16 in the MISTms-combined group finished the study. The MISTms-alone group showed significantly better wound healing at 1 week. CAL significantly gained in the MISTms-alone and MISTms-combined group, with 2.53 ± 1.80 mm and 2.00 ± 1.38 mm respectively. The radiographic bone gain was 3.00 ± 1.56 mm and 3.85 ± 1.69 mm respectively. However, there were no significant differences between the two groups about 1-year outcomes. Lower EHI (optimal wound healing) and more baseline CAL positively influenced 1-year CAL gain. CONCLUSIONS: MISTms is an effective treatment for intrabony defects. The regenerative materials do not show an additional effect on 1-year outcomes. Early wound healing and baseline CAL are factors influencing 1-year CAL gain. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: MISTms with and without regenerative materials are both effective treatments for intrabony defect. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: ChiCTR2100043272.