Growth Factor Enhanced Matrix With Subepithelial Connective Tissue Graft or Collagen Membrane in Treatment of Gingival Recession

Tanta University10 enrolled

Overview

The study aimed to compare, the effectiveness of Growth Factor Enhanced Matrix (GEM 21s) ® combined either with free connective tissue graft or collagen membrane in the treatment of Miller class II gingival recession.

Materials and Methods: Twenty sites in 10 patients, with class II Miller gingival recession were allocated randomly to be treated by (GEM 21s) ® with free connective tissue graft (groupI) or GEM 21s with collagen membrane (groupII). Plaque index, bleeding on probing, recession width, recession depth, height of keratinized tissue and digital measurements were recorded at baseline, 1, 3 and 6-months'. Probing pocket depth, clinical attachment level, gingival thickness and Radiographic parameters were recorded at baseline and 6 months'. Root coverage percentage were recorded 6 months postoperative and wound healing index were recorded at 1,3 and 6-months' post-operative .

Study Type

INTERVENTIONAL

Allocation

RANDOMIZED

Purpose

TREATMENT

Masking

TRIPLE

Enrollment

Conditions

GINGIVAL RECESSION

Interventions

GROUPIPROCEDURE

10 sites treated with Free connective tissue graft (FCTG) + growth factors enhanced matrix 21 s GEM 21S + coronally advanced flap (CAF)

GROUP IIPROCEDURE

10 sites treated withCollagen membrane + GEM 21S + coronally advanced flap (CAF)

Eligibility

Sex: ALLMin age: 25 YearsMax age: 50 Years

Medical Language ↔ Plain English

Inclusion Criteria: * lack of any related medical issues that contraindicate periodontal surgery, * optimum adherence as confirmed by a positive attitude towards oral hygiene, and successfully showing up for treatment appointments. * No history of any medications in the previous six months that may interfere with periodontal surgery Gingival thickness for the selected sites should be \> 1mm (as measured 2mm apical to gingival margin), * Clinical attachment level ≥ 4mm measured from cemento-enamel junction till the deepest probing depth. Exclusion Criteria: * the presence of class V caries or restoration in the site to be treated, * previous mucogingival surgery at the selected site. * Teeth that are tilted, rotated, or have any occlusal abnormalities. * Smokers and pregnant patients were excluded from the participation.

Locations (2)

Malak Mohamed Shoukheba

Tanta, Egypt

Malak Yousef Mohamed Shoukheba

Tanta, Egypt

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Recession width

the distance between the mesial and distal papillae along the CEJ measured at baseline , 1, 3, and 6 months

Time frame: up to 6 months

recession depth

The distance between the CEJ and the gingival margin at the midbuccal aspect of the involved tooth measured at baseline , 1, 3, and 6 months

Time frame: up to 6 months

Height of keratinized tissue

distance from the most apical point of the free gingival margin to the mucogingival junction mid-facially measured at baseline , 1, 3, and 6 months

Time frame: up to 6 months

Gingival thickness (Gingival biotype)

measured at mid-buccal area 2 mm apical to the free gingival margin measured at baseline, and 6 months postoperatively

Time frame: up to 6 months

radiographic measurements of facial bone level, thickness and density

from cone beam CT radiography measured at baseline, and 6 months postoperative

Time frame: up to 6 months

Percentage of root coverage

according to the following formula: (RD at baseline - RD at 6 months) / RD at baseline)x100 was calculated after 6 months

Time frame: up to 6 months

Secondary Outcomes

probing pocket depth

measured from gingival margin to the bottom of the pocket measured at baseline, 3, and 6 months

Time frame: up to 6 months

Data from ClinicalTrials.gov

This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.