MedDataX Logo

Evaluation of Patient Morbidity and Root Coverage Outcomes of VISTA Versus CAF in Treating Gingival Recession

NCT ID: NCT06723314

Last Updated: 2024-12-12

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

30 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2018-01-15

Study Completion Date

2020-10-15

Brief Summary

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

To evaluate and compare Vestibular Incision Subperiosteal Tunnel Access (VISTA) technique,with connective tissue graft; versus Coronally Advanced Flap (CAF) technique;with connective tissue graft, in treating gingival recession in esthetic zone. Patients and Methods: Thirty patients, with Miller class I or class II gingival recession, were included in the current study, with age range from 18 to 55 years. Defects were treated using either VISTA combined with connective tissue graft technique, or CAF combined with connective tissue technique. Post-operative discomfort was evaluated using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) to assess patient morbidity. At baseline, 3, 6 and 9 months, clinical parameters were assessed; Probing Depth (PD), Clinical Attachment Level (CAL), Gingival recession Height (GH), Keratinized Tissue Height (KTH), while Complete and Mean Root Coverage (CRC, MRC) were recorded after nine months. Results: The present study revealed that VISTA showed higher significant difference in pain.VISTA also showed a more reduction in PD, CAL, GH as well as KTH than that of CAF with no significant difference between either of the groups.

Detailed Description

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

To evaluate and compare Vestibular Incision Subperiosteal Tunnel Access (VISTA) technique,with connective tissue graft; versus Coronally Advanced Flap (CAF) technique;with connective tissue graft, in treating gingival recession in esthetic zone. Patients and Methods: Thirty patients, with Miller class I or class II gingival recession, were included in the current study, with age range from 18 to 55 years. Defects were treated using either VISTA combined with connective tissue graft technique, or CAF combined with connective tissue technique. Post-operative discomfort was evaluated using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) to assess patient morbidity. At baseline, 3, 6 and 9 months, clinical parameters were assessed; Probing Depth (PD), Clinical Attachment Level (CAL), Gingival recession Height (GH), Keratinized Tissue Height (KTH), while Complete and Mean Root Coverage (CRC, MRC) were recorded after nine months. Results: The present study revealed that VISTA showed higher significant difference in pain.VISTA also showed a more reduction in PD, CAL, GH as well as KTH than that of CAF with no significant difference between either of the groups. Conclusions: Based on the results of the current study, it can be concluded that both techniques allow improvement in root coverage with no significant differences between them, while VISTA technique showed more pain scores by the VAS than that of CAF technique.

Conditions

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

Esthetic Zone

Keywords

Explore important study keywords that can help with search, categorization, and topic discovery.

recession , gingival recession connective tissue graft coronally advanced flap patient morbidity

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

DOUBLE

Investigators Outcome Assessors
The surgeon performing the surgical technique as well as the patient cannot be blinded because the two surgical procedures are different and recognizable by both the surgeon and the patient after being well informed

Study Groups

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

Vestibular Subperiosteal Tunnel Access

Vestibular Subperiosteal Tunnel Access

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Vestibular Subperiosteal Tunnel Access vista

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

CAF procedures were performed (Split-Full-Split flap), following the anesthetic agent, the sulcular incision was performed by a full thickness vertical incision till the muccogingival junction• Split thickness releasing incision was made at the flap base with full thickness flap reflection till the muccogingival junction.

Coronally Advanced Flap

Coronally Advanced Flap

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Vestibular Subperiosteal Tunnel Access vista

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

CAF procedures were performed (Split-Full-Split flap), following the anesthetic agent, the sulcular incision was performed by a full thickness vertical incision till the muccogingival junction• Split thickness releasing incision was made at the flap base with full thickness flap reflection till the muccogingival junction.

Interventions

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

Vestibular Subperiosteal Tunnel Access vista

CAF procedures were performed (Split-Full-Split flap), following the anesthetic agent, the sulcular incision was performed by a full thickness vertical incision till the muccogingival junction• Split thickness releasing incision was made at the flap base with full thickness flap reflection till the muccogingival junction.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

coronally advanced flap

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

* Age between 18- 55 years
* No sexual discrepancy
* Medically free
* Good oral hygeine
* Sound teeth with single (measuring ≥ 2 mm) or Multiple (measuring ≥ 1 mm)
* Class I or II gingival recession defects and adequate amount of keratinized tissue (3mm width).

Exclusion Criteria

* Patients on anticoagulants, antiplatelets, or glucocorticoids.
* Pregnant females or lactating female patients
* Smoking patients.
* Patients with parafunctional habits.
* Tooth extraction in the surgical sites, active periodontal disease or history of previous surgery in the same area.
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

55 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

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

Misr International University

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

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

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Misr International Unversity

Cairo, , Egypt

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Egypt

Other Identifiers

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

19/2017

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id