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
. 2016 Dec;43(12):1132-1141.
doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12626. Epub 2016 Nov 7.

Patient-reported outcomes and aesthetic evaluation of root coverage procedures: a 12-month follow-up of a randomized controlled clinical trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Patient-reported outcomes and aesthetic evaluation of root coverage procedures: a 12-month follow-up of a randomized controlled clinical trial

Martina Stefanini et al. J Clin Periodontol. 2016 Dec.

Abstract

Aim: To assess patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), aesthetics and stability of root coverage procedures from a previous 6-month RCT after 1 year.

Material & methods: Forty-five patients (90 recessions) had received a coronally advanced flap (CAF = control) only or a xenogeneic collagen matrix in addition (CAF + CMX = test). Visual analogue scales (VAS) and questionnaires were used for PROMs and the root coverage aesthetic score (RES) for professional aesthetic evaluations.

Results: VAS scores (patient satisfaction) amounted to 8.58 ± 1.86 (test) versus 8.38 ± 2.46 (control). Six patients preferred CAF + CMX concerning surgical procedure and aesthetics, six preferred CAF and 29 were equally satisfied. RES was 7.85 ± 2.42 for the test group versus 7.34 ± 2.90 for the controls. Root coverage (RC) was 76.28% for test and 75.05% for control defects. The mean increase in keratinized tissue width was higher in test (from 1.97 to 3.02 mm) than in controls (from 2.00 to 2.64 mm) (p = 0.0413). Likewise, test sites showed more gain in gingival thickness (0.52 mm) than control sites (0.27 mm) (p = 0.0023). Compared to 6 months, clinical outcomes were stable.

Conclusions: Results for PROMs, RES and RC did not significantly differ between treatment groups. Thickness and width of keratinized tissue were enhanced following CAF + CMX compared to CAF alone.

Keywords: aesthetics; collagen (matrix); gingival recession; keratinized tissue; patient-centred outcomes; patient-reported outcomes; root coverage; tissue regeneration; xenograft.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources