RT Generic
T1 Uso de injerto de tejido conectivo en combinación con la técnica en túnel o colgajo de avance coronal para el tratamiento de recesiones gingivales múltiples: un ensayo clínico multicéntrico aleatorizado.
A1 Laciar Oudshoorn, Florencia Elizabeth
AB Antecedentes: Hoy en día no esta claramente establecido que la técnica de túnel sea superior al colgajo de avance coronal en términos de cubrimiento radicular y aumento de anchura de tejido queratinizado debido a la falta de evidencia. Objetivos: El objetivo principal de este ensayo clínico fue evaluar si el uso de un injerto de tejido conectivo combinado con una técnica quirúrgica en “túnel” proporciona mejores resultados en comparación con la técnica de “colgajo de avance coronal” (CAC) con injerto de tejido conectivo (TC) en términos de recubrimiento radicular completo.  Métodos: Análisis intermedio de un ensayo clínico multicéntrico aleatorizado de grupos paralelos. Veintiún pacientes reclutados asignados al grupo control (CAC) o al grupo test (túnel). El cubrimiento radicular completo (CRC), la media de cubrimiento radicular, la reducción de la recesión, la PS, el NIC, la anchura de tejido queratinizado, el índice estético de cubrimiento radicular se tomaron como parámetros clínicos al tiempo basal, a los 3 y 6 meses. Además, se evaluó el tiempo quirúrgico. Resultados: Entre los parámetros clínicos, el incremento de anchura de tejido queratinizado y el tiempo quirúrgico mostrado diferencias estadísticamente significativas entre los 2 grupos, con un aumento de anchura superior en la técnica a túnel, 1.32 (±1.38), respecto al CAC, 0.16 (± 0.66), p<0.000. El tiempo quirúrgico ha sido menor con la técnica a túnel: 44.14 min ± 6.41 respecto al CAC :71.89 min ± 13.72, (p=0.001). Sin embargo, el índice estético radicular a los 6 meses fue significativamente mayor en el grupo control: 9.76 (±0.44) en comparación con el grupo test: 9.11 (± 1.29). Conclusiones: Valorando las limitaciones, se concluye que para la variable respuesta principal (CRC) no existen diferencias significativas entre una técnica u otra. Es necesario el tamaño muestral requerido para valorar si la técnica de túnel mas injerto presenta resultados superiores en la variable respuesta principal.
AB Background: Nowadays, it is not clear if tunnel technique (TUN) is superior to the coronally advanced flap (CAF) in terms of root coverage and increase of keratinized tissue width due to lack of evidence. Objective: The main objective of this study was to evaluate if the use of a TUN + connective tissue graft (CTG) gives better results than the CAF+CTG in terms of complete root coverage. Methods: This is a report of an interim-analysis of a parallel-group multicenter randomized clinical trial. Twenty one patients have been selected and allocated to the control group (CAF+CTG) or to the test group (TUN+CTG). The complete root coverage, the reduction of recession depth, the probing pocket depth, the clinical attachment levels, the keratinized tissue width and the root coverage esthetic index have been evaluated as clinical parameters at baseline and 3 and 6 months follow-up. Moreover, the surgical time has been evaluated.  Results: Regarding clinical parameters, the width of keratinized tissue and the surgical time has shown statistically significant differences between the 2 groups, with an increase of width superior in the TUN+CTG group:1.32±1.38, over the CAF+CTG: 0.16± 0.66, p<0.000. The surgical time has been less in the TUN+CTG:44.14 minutes ± 6.41 than in the CAF+CTG one: 71.89 minutes ± 13.72 (p=0.001). However, the aesthetic score was significantly better for the CAF+CTG group: 9.76±0.44 in comparison with the TUN+CTG group: 9.11± 1.29. Conclusions: Despite the limitations of this ad interim analysis, both techniques have shown a similar efficacy in terms of root coverage. The complete sample is needed in order to determine the existence of superior results of the tunnel technique over the coronal advanced technique.
YR 2020
FD 2020
LK https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/9105
UL https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/9105
LA spa
NO Aroca, S., Keglevich, T., Nikolidakis, D., Gera, I., Nagy, K., Azzi, R., Etienne, D., 2010. Treatment of class III multiple gingival recessions: a randomized-clinical trial. J. Clin. Periodontol. 37, 88–97. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2009.01492.x  Azaripour, A., Kissinger, M., Farina, V.S.L., Van Noorden, C.J.F., GerholdAy, A., Willershausen, B., Cortellini, P., 2016. Root coverage with connective tissue graft associated with coronally advanced flap or tunnel technique: a randomized, double-blind, mono-centre clinical trial. J. Clin. Periodontol. 43, 1142–1150. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12627  Cairo, F., Barootchi, S., Tavelli, L., Barbato, L., Wang, H., Rasperini, G., Graziani, F., Tonetti, M., 2020. Esthetic- and patient-related outcomes following root coverage procedures: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Clin Periodontol jcpe.13346. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.13346  Cairo, F., Cortellini, P., Tonetti, M., Nieri, M., Mervelt, J., Pagavino, G., PiniPrato, G.P., 2015. Stability of root coverage outcomes at single maxillary gingival recession with loss of interdental attachment: 3-year extension results from a randomized, controlled, clinical trial. J. Clin. Periodontol. 42, 575–581. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12412  Cairo, F., Nieri, M., Cincinelli, S., Mervelt, J., Pagliaro, U., 2011. The interproximal clinical attachment level to classify gingival recessions and predict root coverage outcomes: an explorative and reliability study. J. Clin. Periodontol. 38, 661–666. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600051X.2011.01732.x  Cairo, F., Rotundo, R., Miller, P.D., Pini Prato, G.P., 2009. Root coverage esthetic score: a system to evaluate the esthetic outcome of the treatment of gingival recession through evaluation of clinical cases. J. Periodontol. 80, 705–710. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2009.080565  Gobbato, L., Nart, J., Bressan, E., Mazzocco, F., Paniz, G., Lops, D., 2016. Patient morbidity and root coverage outcomes after the application of a subepithelial connective tissue graft in combination with a coronally advanced flap or via a tunneling technique: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig 20, 2191–2202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784016-1721-7  Graziani, F., Gennai, S., Roldán, S., Discepoli, N., Buti, J., Madianos, P., Herrera, D., 2014. Efficacy of periodontal plastic procedures in the treatment of multiple gingival recessions. J. Clin. Periodontol. 41 Suppl 15, S63-76. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12172  Jepsen, K., Stefanini, M., Sanz, M., Zucchelli, G., Jepsen, S., 2017. LongTerm Stability of Root Coverage by Coronally Advanced Flap Procedures. J. Periodontol. 88, 626–633. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2017.160767  Jepsen, S., Caton, J.G., Albandar, J.M., Bissada, N.F., Bouchard, P., Cortellini, P., Demirel, K., de Sanctis, M., Ercoli, C., Fan, J., Geurs, N.C., Hughes, F.J., Jin, L., Kantarci, A., Lalla, E., Madianos, P.N., Matthews, D., McGuire, M.K., Mills, M.P., Preshaw, P.M., Reynolds, M.A., Sculean, A., Susin, C., West, N.X., Yamazaki, K., 2018. Periodontal manifestations of systemic diseases and developmental and acquired conditions: Consensus report of workgroup 3 of the 2017 World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases and Conditions. J. Periodontol. 89 Suppl 1, S237–S248. https://doi.org/10.1002/JPER.17-0733  Moher, D., Hopewell, S., Schulz, K.F., Montori, V., Gøtzsche, P.C., Devereaux, P.J., Elbourne, D., Egger, M., Altman, D.G., Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Group, 2010. CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. J Clin Epidemiol 63, e1-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.03.004 Ozenci, I., Ipci, S.D., Cakar, G., Yilmaz, S., 2015. Tunnel technique versus coronally advanced flap with acellular dermal matrix graft in the treatment of multiple gingival recessions. J. Clin. Periodontol. 42, 1135–1142. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12477  Pini Prato, G., Rotundo, R., Franceschi, D., Cairo, F., Cortellini, P., Nieri, M., 2011. Fourteen-year outcomes of coronally advanced flap for root coverage: follow-up from a randomized trial. J. Clin. Periodontol. 38, 715– 720. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2011.01744.x  Pini-Prato, G., Franceschi, D., Cairo, F., Nieri, M., Rotundo, R., 2010. Classification of dental surface defects in areas of gingival recession. J. Periodontol. 81, 885–890. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2010.090631  Rasperini, G., Acunzo, R., Pellegrini, G., Pagni, G., Tonetti, M., Pini Prato, G.P., Cortellini, P., 2018. Predictor factors for long-term outcomes stability of coronally advanced flap with or without connective tissue graft in the treatment of single maxillary gingival recessions: 9 years results of a randomized controlled clinical trial. J. Clin. Periodontol. 45, 1107–1117. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12932  Rebele, S.F., Zuhr, O., Schneider, D., Jung, R.E., Hürzeler, M.B., 2014. Tunnel technique with connective tissue graft versus coronally advanced flap with enamel matrix derivative for root coverage: a RCT using 3D digital measuring methods. Part II. Volumetric studies on healing dynamics and gingival dimensions. J. Clin. Periodontol. 41, 593–603. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12254  Tavelli, L., Barootchi, S., Nguyen, T.V.N., Tattan, M., Ravidà, A., Wang, H.L., 2018. Efficacy of tunnel technique in the treatment of localized and multiple gingival recessions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Periodontol. 89, 1075–1090. https://doi.org/10.1002/JPER.18-0066  Zabalegui, I., Sicilia, A., Cambra, J., Gil, J., Sanz, M., 1999. Treatment of multiple adjacent gingival recessions with the tunnel subepithelial connective tissue graft: a clinical report. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 19, 199–206.  Zucchelli, G., De Sanctis, M., 2005. Long-term outcome following treatment of multiple Miller class I and II recession defects in esthetic areas of the mouth. J. Periodontol. 76, 2286–2292. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2005.76.12.2286  Zucchelli, G., De Sanctis, M., 2000. Treatment of multiple recession-type defects in patients with esthetic demands. J. Periodontol. 71, 1506–1514. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2000.71.9.1506  Zucchelli, G., Mele, M., Stefanini, M., Mazzotti, C., Marzadori, M., Montebugnoli, L., de Sanctis, M., 2010. Patient morbidity and root coverage outcome after subepithelial connective tissue and de-epithelialized grafts: a comparative randomized-controlled clinical trial. J. Clin. Periodontol. 37, 728–738. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2010.01550.x  Zucchelli, G., Mounssif, I., Mazzotti, C., Stefanini, M., Marzadori, M., Petracci, E., Montebugnoli, L., 2014. Coronally advanced flap with and without connective tissue graft for the treatment of multiple gingival recessions: a comparative short- and long-term controlled randomized clinical trial. J. Clin. Periodontol. 41, 396–403. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12224  Zuhr, O., Fickl, S., Wachtel, H., Bolz, W., Hürzeler, M.B., 2007. Covering of gingival recessions with a modified microsurgical tunnel technique: case report. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 27, 457–463.  Zuhr, O., Rebele, S.F., Schneider, D., Jung, R.E., Hürzeler, M.B., 2014. Tunnel technique with connective tissue graft versus coronally advanced flap with enamel matrix derivative for root coverage: a RCT using 3D digital measuring methods. Part I. Clinical and patient-centred outcomes. J. Clin. Periodontol. 41, 582–592. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12178
NO Encuadrado en la línea de investigación Eficacia de intervenciones para el tratamiento de las enfermedades periodontales y periimplantarias.
DS Docta Complutense
RD 29 abr 2024