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

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
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).

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

Conditions
-----------------
Gingival Recession

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Procedure: E-CTG


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
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

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years
Maximum Age: 60 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Treatment
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Single


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Active Comparator: E-CTG<br>Envelope connective tissue graft | Procedure: E-CTG<br>* Envelope connective tissue graft<br>|
| Active Comparator: SCAF<br>Semilunar connective tissue graft | Procedure: E-CTG<br>* Envelope connective tissue graft<br>|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| recession depth | Distance between CEJ and GM | baseline | 
| recession depth | Distance between CEJ and GM | 6 weeks | 
| recession depth | Distance between CEJ and GM | 6 months | 
| recession depth | Distance between CEJ and GM | 12 months | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| recession width | horizontal distance between two borders of recession at CEJ level | baseline | 
| recession width | horizontal distance between two borders of recession at CEJ level | 6 weeks | 
| recession width | horizontal distance between two borders of recession at CEJ level | 6 months | 
| recession width | horizontal distance between two borders of recession at CEJ level | 12 months | 
| probing depth | distance between GM and base of gingival sulcus | baseline | 
| probing depth | distance between GM and base of gingival sulcus | 6 weeks | 
| probing depth | distance between GM and base of gingival sulcus | 6 months | 
| probing depth | distance between GM and base of gingival sulcus | 12 months | 
| clinical attachment level | distance between CEJ and base of gingival sulcus | baseline | 
| clinical attachment level | distance between CEJ and base of gingival sulcus | 6 weeks | 
| clinical attachment level | distance between CEJ and base of gingival sulcus | 6 months | 
| clinical attachment level | distance between CEJ and base of gingival sulcus | 12 months | 
| keratinized tissue width | distance between GM and MGJ | baseline | 
| keratinized tissue width | distance between GM and MGJ | 6 weeks | 
| keratinized tissue width | distance between GM and MGJ | 6 months | 
| keratinized tissue width | distance between GM and MGJ | 12 months |