Comparative evaluation of surgical modalities for coverage of gingival recession: An Armed Forces Medical College perspective

Abstract

BackgroundEsthetics represents an inseparable part of today's oral therapy, and several procedures have been proposed to preserve or enhance it. Gingival recessions may cause hypersensitivity, impaired esthetics and root caries. Keeping in mind patient's desire for improved esthetics and other related problems, every effort should be made to achieve complete root coverage. MethodsDifferent types of modalities have been introduced to treat gingival recession including displaced flaps, free gingival graft, connective tissue graft, different type of barrier membranes and combination of different techniques. The aim of this study was to compare the commonly used techniques for gingival recession coverage and evaluate the results obtained. 73 subjects were selected for the present study who were randomly divided into four groups and were followed at baseline and 180 days where following parameters were recorded: (a) Assessment of gingival recession depth (RD); (b) Assessment of pocket depth (PD); (c) Assessment of clinical attachment level (CAL) and (d) Assessment of width of attached gingiva (WAG). ResultsResults of this study showed statistically significant reduction of gingival recession, with concomitant attachment gain, following treatment with all tested surgical techniques. However, SCTG with CAF technique showed the highest percentage gain in coverage of recession depth as well as gain in keratinized gingiva. Similar results were obtained with CAF alone. The use of GTR and other techniques showed less predictable coverage and gain in keratinized gingiva. ConclusionConnective tissue grafts were statistically significantly superior to guided tissue regeneration for improvement in gingival recession reduction.