Time Effect on the Predictability of Different Grafting Materials in Treatment of Gingival Recession RT1 in the Esthetic Zone: A Randomized Clinical Trail | ||||
| Egyptian Dental Journal | ||||
| Volume 70, Issue 3, July 2024, Page 2383-2396 PDF (1.11 MB) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/edj.2024.282912.3009 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Dina Hassan YOUNIS 1; Mahetab mohamed mohamed AbdalWahab  2
| ||||
| 1Department of of Oral Medicine, Periodontology, Oral Diagnosis and Oral Radiology Faculty of Dental Medicine, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Egypt. | ||||
| 2Department of Oral Medicine, Periodontology and Oral Diagnosis, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt, and Member of Central Lab of Stem Cells and Biomaterial Applied Research (CLSBAR) in Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt. | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Objectives: In this study, the efficacy of collagen matrix xenograft (XCM) with melatonin gel vs connective tissue graft was compared. Additionally, the study focused on the time impact on this clinical outcome. Methods: 22 systemically healthy patients with MAGR type RT1 were included in the study, and they were split into two groups at random.; Group I/Positive control, treated by means of Modified Coronally Advanced Tunneling Technique technique and connective tissue graft and Group II/study received collagen matrix xenograft with melatonin using MCAT technique. The complete root coverage and other clinical outcomes in terms of keratinized tissue width (KTW), clinical attachment level (CAL), periodontal pocket depth (PPD), Recession depth (RD), and percent of mean root coverage were evaluated at 3 different time intervals. Results: Showed no statistical difference in terms of CRC & all of the before mentioned clinical parameters between the two groups in favor of CTG as being slightly superior in achieving CRC than XCM with melatonin to be after 6 months 16.67%& 0%. & at 9 months CRC was 41.67% & 60%.for XCM with melatonin & CTG respectively. Furthermore, the effect of time was highlighted at baseline, 6, and 9 months through all of the quantitative parameters in each group. CRC significantly increased from 9 % after 6 months to 50 % after 9 months. Conclusion: (XCM) with melatonin gel may be submitted as a substitute for CTG in MAGR treatment due to the predictable results in CRC concurrent with a significant increase of all clinical parameters. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Gingival Recession; Connective Tissue Graft; Collagen matrix Xenograft; Melatonin gel | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 162 PDF Download: 109 |
||||
