Treatment of single maxillary gingival recession associated with non-carious cervical lesion: Randomized clinical trial comparing connective tissue graft alone to graft plus partial restoration

Author(s)

Santamaria, Mauro Pedrine ^[1] ; Silveira, Camila Augusto ^[1] ; Mathias, Ingrid Fernandes ^{[2, 3]} ; da Silva Neves, Felipe Lucas ^[1] ; dos Santos, Lucio Murilo ^[1] ; Neves Jardini, Maria Aparecida ^[1] ; Tatakis, Dimitris N. ^[4] ; Sallum, Enilson Antonio ^[5] ; Bresciani, Eduardo ^[2]

Affiliation

^[1] Sao Paulo State Univ, UNESP, Coll Dent FOSJC, Dept Periodontol, Sao Jose Dos Campos, SP - Brazil

^[2] Sao Paulo State Univ, UNESP, Coll Dent FOSJC, Dept Restorat Dent, Sao Jose Dos Campos, SP - Brazil

^[3] Univ Florida, Coll Dent, Dept Restorat Dent Sci, Gainesville, FL - USA

^[4] Ohio State Univ, Coll Dent, Div Periodontol, Columbus, OH 43210 - USA

^[5] Univ Estadual Campinas, UNICAMP, Piracicaba Dent Sch, Dept Prosthodont & Periodont, Div Periodont, Piracicaba, SP - Brazil

• Document type: Journal article
• Source: JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY; v. 45, n. 8, p. 968-976, AUG 2018.
• Web of Science Citations: 0

Abstract

BackgroundGingival recession (GR) is frequently associated with non-carious cervical lesion (NCCL) forming a combined defect (CD). The aim of this study was to evaluate a new multidisciplinary protocol for CDs. MethodsForty patients presenting 40 Miller's Class I or II GR defects associated with B+ tooth cervical defect were randomly allocated to one of the following treatments: test group (n=20), partial restoration (PR) of the NCCL, in which the apical border of the restoration was placed 1mm beyond the cement-enamel junction estimation, and connective tissue graft (CTG+PR) and Control Group (n=20), odontoplasty of the NCCL and connective tissue graft (CTG). Clinical, aesthetic and patient-centred outcomes were evaluated. ResultsAfter 12months, CD coverage rates were 75.3% (2.51.0mm) for CTG+PR and 74.6% (2.4 +/- 1.1mm) for CTG (p>0.05). The estimated complete root coverage was 60% (n=12) for CTG+PR and 70% (n=14) for CTG. CTG+PR resulted in significantly better dentin hypersensitivity (DH) reduction (p=0.034). Both groups resulted in aesthetic improvements; however, the CTG+PR group showed better gingival contour results. ConclusionsCTG and CTG+PR were effective to treat CD. Use of PR resulted in better gingival margin contour and DH reduction, without effect on CD coverage by CTG. (NCT02817763). (AU)

• FAPESP's process: 15/08701-3 - Effectness of a noval surgical-restorative protocol to treat gingival recession associated with non-carious cervical lesion: pilot study
• Grantee: Tatiane Caroline de Souza
• Support Opportunities: Scholarships in Brazil - Scientific Initiation
• FAPESP's process: 16/26154-2 - Esthetic assessment of two different surgical-restorative approaches to treat gingival recession associated with non-carious cervical lesion: retrospective study
• Grantee: Bruna Viana Barbosa
• Support Opportunities: Scholarships in Brazil - Scientific Initiation