Warning: include(/home/quintpub/public_html/journals/prd/includes/code.php) [function.include]: failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/quintpub/public_html/journals/prd/abstract.php on line 2

Warning: include() [function.include]: Failed opening '/home/quintpub/public_html/journals/prd/includes/code.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php') in /home/quintpub/public_html/journals/prd/abstract.php on line 2
Subepithelial Connective Tissue Graft for Treatment of Gingival Recessions With and Without Enamel Matrix Derivative: A Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
Warning: include(/home/quintpub/public_html/journals/prdincludes/05_update/javascript.php) [function.include]: failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/quintpub/public_html/journals/prd/abstract.php on line 39

Warning: include() [function.include]: Failed opening '/home/quintpub/public_html/journals/prdincludes/05_update/javascript.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php') in /home/quintpub/public_html/journals/prd/abstract.php on line 39
Follow Us      

LOGIN

   Official Journal of The Academy of Osseointegration

 
Share Page:
Back

Volume 31 , Issue 2
March/April 2011

Pages 133-139


Subepithelial Connective Tissue Graft for Treatment of Gingival Recessions With and Without Enamel Matrix Derivative: A Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Giulio Rasperini, DDS/Mario Roccuzzo, DDS/Luca Francetti, MD, DDS/Raffaele Acunzo, DDS/Dario Consonni, MD, PhD/Maurizio Silvestri, DDS


PMID: 21491012
DOI: 10.11607/prd.00.0972

The aim of this multicenter, randomized controlled trial was to compare the clinical outcomes of a connective tissue graft (CTG) alone or in combination with enamel matrix derivative (CTG + EMD) in the treatment of Miller Class I and II gingival recessions. The 56 selected defects were evaluated for probing depth, recession depth, keratinized tissue width, and probing attachment level, and were measured at baseline and 12 months after treatment. The mean recession reduction was 3.9 ± 0.8 mm for EMD-treated sites (test) and 3.6 ± 1.5 mm for the control group (P = .22), corresponding to a mean root coverage of 90% and 80% for test and control groups, respectively (P = .05). Complete root coverage was obtained in 62% of test sites compared to 47% in the control group (P = .27). Both procedures provided good soft tissue coverage. The better results of the test group did not achieve a statistically significant level. (Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2011;31:133–139.)


Full Text PDF File | Order Article

 

 
Get Adobe Reader
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF files. This is a free program available from the Adobe web site.
Follow the download directions on the Adobe web site to get your copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader.

 

© 2020 Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc

PRD Home
Current Issue
Ahead of Print
Archive
Author Guidelines
About
Submission Form
Submit
Reprints
Permission
Advertising
Quintessence Home
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
About Us
Contact Us
Help