The objective of this project is to compare post-operative pain associated with palatal and tuberosity donor sites for micro-CTG, and to evaluate the outcomes in both the donor and recipient sites.
A variety of surgical methods have been reported to reestablish root coverage, including tunneling techniques and coronally and laterally advanced flaps. As thin gingival tissue is one of the predisposing factors for GRD, the adjuvant use of subepithelial connective tissue grafts (CTGs) is often considered. CTGs are thought to contribute to phenotype modification and stability of treatment outcomes and studies have indicated favorable esthetic results and high degrees of root coverage. CTGs are preferably harvested either from the lateral superficial part of the palate or from the tuberosity, due to the high amount of lamina propria and minimal submucosal tissue (adipose and glandular tissue). When multiple adjacent teeth exhibit GRDs, the preferred surgical approach should offer the greatest possible root coverage, while limiting drawbacks (i.e., patient morbidity, esthetic problems). Thus, one of the challenges related to coverage of multiple GRDs is the scarcity of donor tissue. Modification of the harvested CTG into multiple "micro-CTG" has been proposed for the treatment of multiple adjacent GRDs (MAGRD) in order to reduce the amount of CTG to be harvested. Soft-tissue grafts from the tuberosity are increasingly gaining popularity not only because they are easier to harvest, are denser in connective tissue fibers but also because harvesting from the tuberosity presents minimal risk of intra- or post-operative complications, resulting in reduced patient morbidity. However CTG from maxillary tuberosity have been reported to induce a hyperplastic response in some patients. The objective of this study will be to compare palatal versus tuberosity micro-CTG on postoperative pain, oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL), degree of root coverage and esthetic outcomes. The investigators hypothesise that no statistically significant differences will be observed in terms of %root coverage and patient satisfaction at 12 months (non-inferiority). Subjects in the test group (micro-CTG) will report significantly lower morbidity at 1 and 2 weeks post-surgery when compared to controls (superiority).
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
TRIPLE
Enrollment
30
The connective tissue graft will be harvested from the palate.
The connective tissue graft will be harvested from the maxillary tuberosity.
Mean mid-facial recession coverage (mRC)
Percentage of the exposed tooth root covered after surgical intervention
Time frame: up to 1 year
Complete Root Coverage (CRC)
Frequency of complete root coverage
Time frame: up to 1 year
Changes of Keratinized Tissue Width (KTW)
Measured as the distance from the muco-gingival-junction to the gingival margin
Time frame: up to 1 year
Changes of Gingival Thickness (GT)
Measured 3 mm apically from the free gingival margin at the mid-buccal aspect of the tooth
Time frame: up to 1 year
Patient Morbidity/Discomfort
Measured using an oral health-related quality of life questionnaire (OHRQoL)
Time frame: up to 2 weeks
Patient Satisfaction
Measured with Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), which consists of a 10cm line, with two end points representing 0 ('not satisfied') and 10 ('satisfied as much as it could possibly be')
Time frame: up to 1 year
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.