Treatment of gingival recession by coronally advanced flap in conjunction with platelet-rich fibrin or resin-modified glass-ionomer restoration: A clinical study

Ramireddy, Sudheer; Mahendra, Jaideep; Rajaram, Vijayalakshmi; Ari, Geetha; Kanakamedala, Anil Kumar; Krishnakumar, Dhanadivya

doi:10.4103/jisp.jisp_283_17

Cited by 8 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The point estimate is the effect size of PD between the interventions administered to the treatment and control arms. As can be observed from the figure, Isler et al, 6 Santamaria et al, 7,23,24 Dursun et al, 26 Lucchesi et al, 28 and Ramireddy et al 29 reported a significant difference in the PD value between the 2 arms in their experiments.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…Three studies 22,23,30 had a split-mouth design, while the others used a parallel group design. Eleven RCTs 6,7,[22][23][24][25][26][28][29][30][31] performed complete NCCL restoration, whereas 2 -by Santamaria et al 8 and Mathias-Santamaria et al 27 employed partial restoration.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Examiner masking was not practical in most of the studies, 6,7,[23][24][25][26][28][29][30][31] as it was easy to note whether the restoration was present. The investigators who recruited patients and the examiner were masked to the procedure in the study by Mathias-Santamaria et al 27…”

Section: Maskingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A total of 428 patients were enrolled in the 13 included articles, 12 studies 6,7,8,22,23,[25][26][27][28][29][30][31] completed the follow-up periods and 1 RCT 24 reported dropouts. The characteristics of the studies are shown in Table 1.…”

Section: Included Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Root coverage with the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis

CHAWLA,

Goyal

2024

Dent. Med. Probl.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The progression of non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) leads to gingival recession (GR), which is restored with restorative materials, using different periodontal plastic surgery procedures. There is no consensus on which technique is superior to others. Therefore, the present systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness of root coverage (RC) procedures in the restored and unrestored NCCLs in terms of clinical and patient-centered outcomes. We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) while searching 5 databases in addition to the gray literature. The Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms and keywords in the title and abstract fields, as well as in headings, were used to search the existing literature for the relevant publications on the effectiveness of RC procedures with the restoration of NCCLs over the past 3 decades (January 1990-July 2021). After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 13 articles were read in full and critically analyzed. The quality analysis was performed using the Cochrane RevMan software.A total of 222 potentially relevant titles and abstracts were found after the initial electronic and manual search, and after removing duplicates. Applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria yielded 23 publications that were further analyzed for relevance and applicability. Following critical analysis, 13 publications were used for validity assessment and data extraction.In the teeth with NCCLs and GR, the restoration of NCCLs does not affect the percentage RC. However, it significantly decreases dentin hypersensitivity, and the patients' perception of esthetics and satisfaction.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Maskingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Included Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Root coverage with the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis

CHAWLA,

Goyal

2024

Dent. Med. Probl.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…11 The PRF membrane also acts as a scaffold that maintains the space for cellular events associated with periodontal healing. 36 A greater number of PRF layers is favorable for root coverage. 12 Therefore, we used three PRF membranes in the test group, because it was not possible to insert a larger number of PRF membranes inside the tunnel without damaging the flap.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Root coverage with platelet-rich fibrin or connective tissue graft: a split-mouth randomized trial

Carrera,

Machado,

Soares

et al. 2023

Braz. oral res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to compare the use of connective tissue grafts (CTG) and platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) associated with the tunnel technique (TT) for the treatment of multiple gingival recessions (GR). Fourteen patients with multiple bilateral GR [type 1 recession (RT 1)] in the maxillary incisors, canines, and/or premolars were included. The TT was performed on both sides (split-mouth model); CTG (36 GR) was used on one side, and on the other, PRF (36 GR) was used. Clinical parameters, including recession depth (RD), probing depth, clinical attachment level (CAL), and keratinized gingiva thickness/width (GT/KTW), were obtained at baseline and after 1, 3, 6, and 16 months. Lower RD (0.81 ± 0.68 vs. 1.23 ± 0.71 mm) and CAL (2.54 ± 0.63 vs. 2.73 ± 0.82 mm) were observed for CTG compared to PRF after 16 months. Higher GT was obtained for CTG compared to PRF after 3 (1.81 ± 0.56 vs 1.43 ± 0.47 mm) and 6 months (1.67 ± 0.61 vs. 1.38 ± 0.55 mm, p < 0.05). The recession coverage (RC) was higher for CTG (55.42% ± 37.14) in comparison to PRF (29.53% ± 34.08) after 16 months (p < 0.05). Similarly, CTG presented a more complete coverage of the recession (15; 41.66%) than PRF (9; 24.32%). There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of surgery time, postoperative pain, or healing patterns. Greater esthetic satisfaction was obtained with CTG. It was concluded that CTG combined with TT showed clinical and esthetic results superior to those of PRF in multiple GR treatments.

show abstract

Efficacy of biologics in root coverage and gingival augmentation therapy: An American Academy of Periodontology best evidence systematic review and network meta‐analysis

Barootchi

Ávila‐Ortiz

2022

Journal of Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The aim of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy of three biologics, namely autologous blood-derived products (ABPs), enamel matrix derivatives (EMD) and recombinant human platelet-derived growth factor BB (rhPDGF-BB), in root coverage and gingival augmentation therapy. Methods: The protocol of this PRISMA 2020-compliant systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021285917). After study selection, data of interest were extracted. A network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to assess the effect of different surgical interventions on the main clinical outcomes of interest (i.e., mean root coverage [MRC%], complete root coverage [CRC%], keratinized tissue width [KTW], gingival thickness [GT] change, and recession depth [RD] reduction).Results: A total of 48 trials reported in 55 articles were selected. All studies reported on the treatment of gingival recession defects for root coverage purposes. Forty-six treatment arms from 24 trials were included in the NMA. These arms consisted of treatment with coronally advanced flap (CAF) alone, EMD + CAF, platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) + CAF, and subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) + CAF. Regarding MRC%, SCTG+CAF was associated with a significant higher estimate (13.41%, 95% CI [8.06-18.75], P < 0.01), while EMD+CAF (6.68%, 95% CI [−0.03 to 13.4], P = 0.061) and PRF+CAF (1.03%, 95% CI [−5.65 to 7.72], P = 0.71) failed to show statistically significant differences compared with CAF alone (control group) or with each other. Similarly, only SCTG+CAF led to a significantly higher CRC% (14.41%, 95% CI [4.21 to 24.61], P < 0.01), while treatment arms EMD + CAF (13.48%, 95% CI [−3.34 to 30.32], P = 0.11) and PRF+CAF (-0.91%, 95% CI [−15.38, 13.57], p = 0.81) did not show significant differences compared with CAF alone or with each other. Differences in the CI of PRF+CAF (symmetrical around a zero adjunctive effect) and EMD+CAF (nonsymmetrical) suggest that EMD could have some additional value compared with PRF. Treatment with SCTG+CAF led to a statistically significant higher RD reduction (-0.39 mm, 95% CI [−0.55 to 0.22], P < 0.01), however EMD+CAF

show abstract

Treatment of gingival recession by coronally advanced flap in conjunction with platelet-rich fibrin or resin-modified glass-ionomer restoration: A clinical study

Cited by 8 publications

References 13 publications

Root coverage with the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Root coverage with the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Root coverage with platelet-rich fibrin or connective tissue graft: a split-mouth randomized trial

Efficacy of biologics in root coverage and gingival augmentation therapy: An American Academy of Periodontology best evidence systematic review and network meta‐analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About