Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2013 Nov;84(11):1576-85.
doi: 10.1902/jop.2013.120451. Epub 2013 Feb 22.

Coronally advanced flap alone or with connective tissue graft in the treatment of single gingival recession defects: a long-term randomized clinical trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Coronally advanced flap alone or with connective tissue graft in the treatment of single gingival recession defects: a long-term randomized clinical trial

Davor Kuis et al. J Periodontol. 2013 Nov.

Abstract

Background: Numerous surgical approaches for the treatment of single gingival recession (GR) defects are documented in the literature. The aim of this 5-year, split mouth-design, randomized clinical trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of coronally advanced flap (CAF) alone versus CAF with connective tissue graft (CAF+CTG) in the treatment of single Miller Class I and II GR defects.

Methods: Thirty-seven patients with 114 bilateral, single Miller Class I and II GR defects were treated with CAF on one side of the mouth and CAF+CTG on the other side. Clinical measurements (GR length [REC], keratinized tissue width [KT], complete root coverage [CRC], and percentage of root coverage [PRC]) were evaluated before surgery and after 6, 12, 24, and 60 months.

Results: There was a significant reduction of REC and increase of KT after surgery in both groups. CAF+CTG showed significantly better results for all evaluated clinical parameters in all observed follow-up periods. Miller Class I defects showed better results in terms of REC, CRC, and PRC, whereas Miller Class II showed better results in KT, both in favor of CAF+CTG. Miller Class I defects showed better results than Miller Class II GR defects regardless of the surgical procedure used.

Conclusions: Both surgical procedures were effective in the treatment of single Miller Class I and II GR defects. The CAF+CTG procedure provided better long-term outcomes (60 months postoperatively) than CAF alone. Long-term stability of the gingival margin is less predictable for Miller Class II GR defects compared to those of Class I.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources