Soft Tissue Augmentation Using Deepithelialized Free Gingival Graft Compared to Connective Tissue Graft in Management of Miller Class I and II Gingival Recession.

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

28 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2017-10-17

Study Completion Date

2019-07-27

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The aim of this study will be to clinically assess the soft tissue augmentation achieved by the de-epithelialized free gingival graft with coronally advanced flap versus the subepithelial connective tissue graft with coronally advanced flap as root coverage procedures for management of patients with Miller class I and II gingival recession.

Related Clinical Trials

Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.

Treatment of Miller Class I and II Gingival Recession Using Non- Pedicled Buccal Fat Pad Graft as Compared to Subepithelial Connective Tissue Graft

NCT03543163

Gingival Recession

UNKNOWN NA

Effectiveness of the Papillary Extended Connective Tissue Graft in Miller Class III Gingival Recession

NCT03416673

Gingival Recession

UNKNOWN NA

Evaluation of Root Coverage After the Use of Coronally Advanced Flap Either With Advanced Paltelet Rich Fibrin or Subepithilial Connective Tissue Graft in Treatment of Miller Class I and II Gingival Recession.

NCT03695549

Gingival Recession

UNKNOWN NA

Tunneling Technique in Treatment of Miller's Class III Gingival Recession

NCT03657706

Gingival Recession

UNKNOWN NA

Evaluation of Subepithelial Connective Tissue Graft Versus Acellular Dermal Matrix With Tunnel Technique in Treatment of Multiple Gingival Recessions

NCT02916186

Gingival Recession

UNKNOWN NA

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Evidence from the literature showed that coronally advanced flap was a predictable method for root coverage. The addition of a connective tissue graft was also found to improve the outcome of obtaining complete root coverage in Miller class I and II gingival recession. Many different connective tissue graft-harvesting techniques have been utilized. These techniques aimed at reducing patient morbidity by primary closure of the palatal flap to achieve primary intention wound healing. However, they had the limitation of requiring an adequate thickness of the palatal fibromucosa in order to prevent desquamation of the undermined flap and compromised vasculature.

On the other hand, the free gingival graft surgical technique was also unaccepted esthetically due to the white scar and irregularities produced at the monolingual junction.

Moreover, despite the fact that the free gingival graft had its limitation of being associated with greater post-operative pain, discomfort and bleeding due to healing by secondary intention in 2-4 weeks, nevertheless, this technique was much easier to perform and could be used even in cases of thin palatal fibromucosa.

The evidence in literature comparing patient morbidity and root coverage outcomes between these two techniques is minimal. Studies by Griffin et al. (2006) and Wessel and Tatakis (2008) reported increased incidence of post-operative pain with free gingival grafts. However, a recently study by Zucchelli et al. (2010) compared post-operative morbidity and root coverage outcomes in patients treated with trap-door connective tissue graft and de-epithelialized free gingival graft found no statistically significant differences in pain killer consumption, post-operative discomfort and bleeding between the two groups.

Still very few studies measured the effect of different connective tissue graft harvesting techniques on gingival thickness. And even in the study by Zucchelli et al. (2010), only speculative explanation was given regarding the increase of gingival thickness in case of a de-epithelialized free gingival graft than subepithelial connective tissue graft.

Gingival thickness was proved to be an important factor for the etiology of gingival recession as thick gingival tissues are able to confine the inflammation within the region of the gingival sulcus and prevent its extension to destroy the outer gingival tissue leading to gingival recession.

Therefore, this study will monitor the effect of different connective tissue harvesting techniques (De-epithelialized free gingival graft versus subepithelial connective tissue graft) on gingival thickness enhancement. It will also evaluate the de-epithelialized free gingival graft as a harvesting mechanism for connective tissue graft in terms of patient morbidity and root coverage outcomes.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Gingival Recession

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Parallel groups, randomized clinical trial

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

DOUBLE

Caregivers Outcome Assessors

Single blinded:

* Blinding of the participants is not applicable.
* Blinding of the operator is not applicable.
* Outcome assessor (primary and secondary outcomes) \& biostatistician will be blinded.

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Subepithelial connective tissue graft

Patients will receive a coronally advanced flap surgery with a subepithelial connective tissue graft for recession coverage.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Coronally advanced flap and subepithelial connective tissue graft

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

The connective tissue graft is obtained by a single line incision from the palate.

De-epithelialized free gingival graft

Patients will receive a coronally advanced flap surgery with a de-epithelialized free gingival graft for recession coverage.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Coronally advanced flap and deepithelialized free gingival graft

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

The connective tissue graft is obtained by deepithelialization of a free gingival graft.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Coronally advanced flap and subepithelial connective tissue graft

The connective tissue graft is obtained by a single line incision from the palate.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Coronally advanced flap and deepithelialized free gingival graft

The connective tissue graft is obtained by deepithelialization of a free gingival graft.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

1. Patients 18 years or older.
2. Periodontally and systemically healthy.
3. Buccal recession defects classified as either Miller class I or II.
4. Presence of identifiable Cementoenamel juction (Zucchelli et al., 2010).
5. Clinical indication and/or patient request for recession coverage.
6. O'Leary index less than 20% (O'Leary et al., 1972).

Exclusion Criteria

1. Miller class III or IV recession defects.
2. Pregnant females.
3. Smokers as smoking is a contraindication for any plastic periodontal surgery (Khuller, 2009).
4. Handicapped and mentally retarded patients.
5. Patients undergoing radiotherapy.
6. Teeth with cervical restorations, abrasion.
7. Presence of systemic disease that would affect wound healing.

Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes