In patients with single RT1 recessions and thin gingival phenotype, does adding cross-linked hyaluronic acid by microneedling after CAF surgery produce greater gingival thickness gain and higher probability of complete root coverage at 6 months than microneedling alone?
The aim of this study is to evaluate changes in gingival thickness and root coverage outcomes after coronally advanced flap (CAF) then cross-linked hyaluronic acid injection along with performing microneedling in patients with RT1 single gingival recession with thin gingival phenotype in esthetic region.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE
Enrollment
22
Microneedling sessions will be performed 1 month after the CAF procedure to ensure initial flap healing. The micro-needling technique will be performed under local anesthesia, by using Dr. Pen Ultima M8 MN pen (Dr. Pen; Phoenix, AZ, USA) using 16-Pins gauge with a diameter of 0.18 mm adjusted with 1.5 mm depth at the 6th mode speed of 700 cycles/min. The MN needles are vertically inserted into the keratinized tissue reaching the bone, for 30-40 s per tooth using an intermittent motion along the keratinized tissue. Then, cross-linked hyaluronic acid will be injected in a volume of 0.2mm of a 20 mg/ml concentration with particle size 400 μm. HA injection will be administrated until blanching of gingiva is evident. To ascertain that the HA is distributed evenly, the region will be gently massaged for 2 to 3 min with a sterile gauze soaked in saline. This Microneedling technique with HA injection will be repeated four times at 10-day intervals.
Microneedling sessions will be performed 1 month after CAF procedure to ensure initial flap healing. The micro-needling technique will be performed under local anesthesia, by using Dr. Pen Ultima M8 MN pen (Dr. Pen; Phoenix, AZ, USA) using 16-Pins gauge with a diameter of 0.18 mm adjusted with 1.5 mm depth at the 6th mode speed of 700 cycles/min. The MN needles are vertically inserted into the keratinized tissue reaching the bone, for 30-40 s per tooth using an intermittent motion along the keratinized tissue. This method will be repeated four times at 10-day intervals.
Gingival thickness
using a No.15 endodontic spreader with a silicon stopper placed 2 mm apical to the gingival margin at the mid-buccal aspect; depth of penetration measured with a ruler to the nearest 0.5 mm.
Time frame: 6-months post surgery
Complete Root Coverage (CRC)
Time frame: 6 months post surgery
Percentage of Root Coverage (%)
Time frame: 6 months post surgery
Keratinized Tissue Width (KTW)
Time frame: 6 months post surgery
Recession Depth (RD)
Time frame: 6 months post surgery
Recession Width (RW)
Time frame: 6 months post surgery
Recession Reduction (Rec-Red)
Time frame: 6 months post surgery
Clinical Attachment Level (CAL)
Time frame: 6 months post surgery
Probing Depth (PD)
Time frame: 6 months post surgery
Root Coverage Esthetic Score (RES)
Root coverage esthetic score (RES) will be measured through direct clinical inspection without magnification and will include five variables: gingival margin (GM), marginal tissue contour (MTC), soft tissue texture (STT), mucogingival junction alignment (MGJ), and gingival color (GC). Zero, 3, or 6 points were used for the evaluation of the position of the gingival margin, whereas a score of 0 or 1 point was used for each of the other variables. Scoring System The maximum achievable esthetic score is 10 points. A score of 0 points is assigned if the final position of the gingival margin is equal to or apical to the initial recession depth, indicating failure of the root coverage procedure, regardless of the other parameters (color, scar formation, MTC, or MGJ). A score of 0 points is also assigned when partial or complete loss of the interproximal papilla (black triangle) occurs following treatment.
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Time frame: 6 months post surgery
Condition-specific Health-related Quality-of-life
Condition-specific health-related quality-of-life will be assumed to evaluate the patient satisfaction with the treatment outcome using a questionnaire based on a 5-point Likert scale, where patients will rate their level of satisfaction with the esthetic outcome and overall treatment result. The response options will range from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 5 (very satisfied). The questionnaire will be administered at the 6-month follow-up visit, and the mean satisfaction score will be calculated for each group for statistical comparison.
Time frame: 6 months post surgery