KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Aydın Dental Journal / 2016 / Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 2

Complete Root Coverage for Miller Class I and II – Recession Type Defects: Meta-Analysis of CAF+EMD Versus CAF+FCTG

Rüdiger JUNKER
Andreas LEINER
Daniela ZITSCH
Thomas ULRICH
Wilhelm FRANK
Adrian KASAJ
Sayfa
1–21
Yayın Tarihi
2016-05-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Conclusion: Regarding percentage complete root coverage, CAF + EMD is not as effective as CAF + FCTG for Miller class I and II recession- type defects

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Background: To the best of our knowledge, the equality of CAF + EMD and CAF + FCTG regarding complete root coverage in Miller class I and II recession-type defects is still uncertain.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Thereby, equality on the longer term of both therapeutic options is hypothesized (H0- hypothesis).Materials and methods: Three reviewers searched independently within the electronic database Pubmed/Medline.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Conclusion: Regarding percentage complete root coverage, CAF + EMD is not as effective as CAF + FCTG for Miller class I and II recession- type defects
🔬Tür:Literatür & Derleme Çalışması
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Miller class I and II recession-type defects · root coverage · coronally advanced flap

Abstract

Background: To the best of our knowledge, the equality of CAF + EMD and CAF + FCTG regarding complete root coverage in Miller class I and II recession-type defects is still uncertain. Aim: The aim of the current paper is to compare the effect of CAF + EMD versus CAF + FCTG regarding complete root recession coverage. Thereby, equality on the longer term of both therapeutic options is hypothesized (H0- hypothesis).Materials and methods: Three reviewers searched independently within the electronic database Pubmed/Medline. Only RCTs reporting quantitative data for the outcome variable percentage complete root coverage (%CRC) for the therapeutic options CAF + EMD or CAF + FCTG were considered. Additionally a manual search in the reference lists of all included publications was accomplished.Results: After electronical and manual search for relevant studies, the three independent reviewers (DZ, TU, AL) screened 552 titles, resulting in 102 abstracts and 41 full-texts. Eventually, twenty-five papers could be included for meta-analysis. By comprehensively comparing data from RCTs for the outcome variable “percentage complete root coverage”, statistically significant weighted mean differences in favor of CAF + FCTG were found at 6, 12 and 24 months. Conclusion: Regarding percentage complete root coverage, CAF + EMD is not as effective as CAF + FCTG for Miller class I and II recession- type defects

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

JUNKER, R., LEINER, A., ZITSCH, D., ULRICH, T., FRANK, W., KASAJ, A. (2016). Complete Root Coverage for Miller Class I and II – Recession Type Defects: Meta-Analysis of CAF+EMD Versus CAF+FCTG. Aydın Dental Journal, Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 2, 1–21. https://ajindex.com/articles/738473

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (9)

  1. Abolfazli N, Saleh-Saber F, Eskandari A, Lafzi A. A comparative study of the long term results of root coverage with connective tissue graft or enamel matrix protein: 24-month results. Medicina oral, patología oral y cirugía bucal 2009;14;304–309. Academy Report. Oral reconstrucitve and corrective considerations in periodontal therapy. J Periodontol 2005;76;1588-1600.
  2. Alkan EA, Parlar A. EMD or subepithelial connective tissue graft for the treatment of single gingival recessions: A pilot study. J Periodontol Res 2011; 46;637–642.
  3. Alkan EA, Parlar A. Enamel matrix derivative (emdogain) or subepithelial connective tissue graft for the treatment of adjacent multiple gingival recessions: a pilot study. Int J Perio Rest Dent 2013;33;619–25.
  4. Allen E, Miller P. Coronal positioning of existing Gingiva: Short term results in the treatment of shallow marginal tissue recession. J Periodontol 1989;60;316–319.
  5. Aroca S, Molnár B, Windisch P, Gera I, Salvi GE, Nikolidakis D, Sculean A. Treatment of multiple adjacent Miller class I and II gingival recessions with a Modified Coronally Advanced Tunnel (MCAT) technique and a collagen matrix or palatal connective tissue graft: A randomized, controlled clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol 2013;40;713–720. Boyd RL. Mucogingival considerations and their relationship to orthodontics. J Periodontol 1978;49;67–76.
  6. Cairo F, Cortellini P, Tonetti M, Nieri M, Mervelt J, Cincinelli S, Pini- Prato G. Coronally advanced flap with and without connective tissue graft for the treatment of single maxillary gingival recession with loss of interdental attachment. A randomized controlled clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol, 2012;39;760–768.
  7. Cairo F, Nieri M, Pagliaro U. Efficacy of periodontal plastic surgery procedures in the treatment of localized facial gingival recessions. A systematic review. J Clin Periodontol 2014;41;44–62.
  8. Cairo F, Pagliaro U, Nieri M. Treatment of gingival recession with coronally advanced flap procedures: A systematic review. J Clin Periodontol 2008; 35 Suppl. 8;136–162.
  9. Cardaropoli D, Tamagnone L, Roffredo A, Gaveglio L. Treatment of gingival recession defects using coronally advanced flap with a porcine collagen matrix compared to coronally advanced flap with connective tissue graft: A randomized controlled clinical trial. J Periodontol 2012;83;321–328. Castellanos A, de la Rosa M, de la Garza M, Caffesse RG. Enamel matrix derivative and coronal flaps to cover marginal tissue recessions. J Periodontol 2006;77;7–14. Ch