MedDataX Logo

Comparison of Two Techniques in Gingival Recession Treatment. One-year Clinical Follow-up Study

NCT ID: NCT04109794

Last Updated: 2019-09-30

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

42 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2012-12-31

Study Completion Date

2014-05-31

Brief Summary

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

42 patients were treated either with E-CTG (N=20) or SCAF (N=22). The recordings included clinician-based (recession depth, recession width, probing depth, clinical attachment level, keratinized tissue width, tissue thickness, clinical attachment gain (CAG), root coverage (RC), keratinized tissue change (KTC)) and patient-based (wound healing index (WHI), dentine hypersensitivity (DH), tissue appearance, patient expectations and aesthetics) parameters that were taken at baseline, T1 (sixth week), T2 (sixth month) and T3 (first year).

Detailed Description

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

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

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Outcome Assessors

Study Groups

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

E-CTG

Envelope connective tissue graft

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

E-CTG

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Envelope connective tissue graft

SCAF

Semilunar connective tissue graft

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

E-CTG

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Envelope connective tissue graft

Interventions

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

E-CTG

Envelope connective tissue 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

* single Miller I GR defects ≤3mm at upper anterior or premolar teeth
* systemically healthy
* identifiable cemento-enamel junction (CEJ)
* PD ≤3 mm

Exclusion Criteria

* periodontal surgery experience in the past two years
* excessive contacts
* mobility
* caries
* loss of vitality
* smoking
* pregnancy
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

60 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Kırıkkale University

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

H. Gencay Keceli

Associate Professor

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Evginer MS, Olgun E, Parlak HM, Dolgun AB, Keceli HG. Comparison of two techniques in gingival recession treatment: A randomized one-year clinical follow-up study. Dent Med Probl. 2022 Jan-Mar;59(1):121-130. doi: 10.17219/dmp/137621.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 35394710 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

SerdarEvginer

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id