上皮下结缔组织移植术治疗正畸后牙龈退缩1例

［摘要］ 牙龈退缩是正畸治疗常见的并发症,目前对于牙龈退缩的治疗主要是根面覆盖。报告1例正畸后牙龈退缩的患者,经过上皮下结缔组织移植术联合冠向复位瓣,取得了理想的根面覆盖,角化龈宽度及牙龈厚度增加,达到良好的临床效果。     

冠向复位瓣联合结缔组织移植术治疗下颌后牙区多发牙龈退缩

冠向复位瓣是一种有效地治疗多个相邻牙龈退缩的手术方法．5年的长期随访可以获得稳定的效果。本研究的目的是报告10例采用冠向复位瓣联合结缔组织移植术治疗下颔后牙区至少两颗相邻牙有牙龈退缩的病例。记录基线和术后1年术区牙齿的牙周指标。入选了26颗牙龈退缩牙齿,没有出现明显的手术并发症。没有患者失访。牙龈退缩从基线时340±083mm减少到术后1年时0284±032mm。探诊深度改变未见显著差异。角化龈的增加从057±0．46mm至305±0．71mm。基线时牙龈退缩越严重．牙龈退缩改善越明显。平均根面覆盖率为91．2％±4．1％。冠向复位瓣联合结缔组织移植术是一种有效地治疗下颔后牙区多发牙龈退缩的方法。     

软组织移植用于治疗正畸后牙龈退缩的临床疗效分析

目的:用软组织移植的方法治疗正畸后牙龈退缩,通过统计相关临床指标来评估软组织移植治疗正畸治疗后牙龈退缩的临床效果.方法:收集正畸治疗后发生牙龈退缩的患者12例,均为MillerⅠ类、MillerⅡ类牙龈退缩,采用冠向复位瓣+结缔组织移植或游离龈移植的方法治疗牙龈退缩,在基线和术后1年随访时分别记录每颗牙牙龈退缩深度(RD)、角化龈宽度(KTW)、根面覆盖率(RC),探诊深度(PD),采用视觉模拟评分法(VAS)评估患者对手术的满意度,计算各项临床指标平均值变化.结果:12例患者的平均基线RD为(3.7±0.9)mm,术后1年平均RD为(0.3±0.9)mm;术后1年患者的平均RC为(97.1±6.3)％,大部分牙齿得到完全根面覆盖;患者基线和术后1年平均KTW为(0.8±0.3)mm和(3.8±0.6)mm,角化龈增加明显;PD从基线(1.5±0.5)mm减少到(1.2±0.5)mm;术后1年患者满意度评分为(9.6±0.6)分,大部分患者对术后效果感到满意且根面敏感情况好转.结论:正畸治疗后牙龈退缩的患者采用冠向复位瓣+结缔组织移植或游离龈移植的方法均可取得良好临床效果,患者根面敏感情况得到明显改善且满意度高.     

富血小板纤维蛋白辅助治疗牙龈退缩的临床效果及患者满意度评价

目的 评价和比较冠向复位瓣术单独或联合应用富血小板纤维蛋白（platelet rich fibrin,PRF）治疗Miller Ⅰ类或Ⅱ类牙龈退缩的临床效果及患者满意度。方法 临床上选取Miller Ⅰ类或Ⅱ类牙龈退缩且有意愿进行手术治疗的患者30例,分为试验组（冠向复位瓣术联合PRF）、对照组（冠向复位瓣术）。在术前、术后3个月、术后6个月记录牙周探诊深度、角化龈宽度、牙龈退缩深度以及根面覆盖率,分析2组的临床疗效,患者填写满意度调查表,并进行分析。结果 试验组和对照组在术后3、6个月检查临床指标牙龈退缩深度、角化龈宽度较术前明显好转,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）;术后3、6个月,试验组和对照组2组间角化龈宽度比较,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）;术后3、6个月,2组间牙周探诊深度、牙龈退缩深度、根面覆盖率比较均无统计学差异(P>0.05);术后3、6个月时,2组中的牙周探诊深度与术前相比,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);试验组患者的满意度显著高于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 本研究结果进一步证实了这两种方法对MillerⅠ、Ⅱ类牙龈退缩的治疗均有效,辅助应用PRF可增加术后角化龈宽度,并提高患者满意度。     

牙龈退缩根面覆盖治疗1例

目的 牙龈退缩常常导致根面敏感、菌斑控制不良和牙龈美学等问题,影响患者的口腔健康和颜面美观。本病例采用根面覆盖术治疗牙龈退缩,以改善患者牙齿敏感问题。诊治经过：手术采用冠向复位瓣联合结缔组织移植瓣双层技术治疗退缩类型（recession type,RT）为1类的牙龈退缩。结果 术后2周,受区龈缘略水肿;术后12个月复诊,龈缘位置趋于稳定,根面覆盖率达100%,角化龈宽度及临床附着水平增加。患者无牙齿敏感、系带牵拉和瘢痕形成等不适症状,牙龈美学效果良好。结论 冠向复位瓣联合结缔组织移植瓣双层技术治疗RT 1类牙龈退缩效果良好,不仅能够获得完全根面覆盖、牙龈美学效果良好,而且增加了术区角化牙龈的宽度和临床附着水平。     

PRF治疗牙龈退缩的对照研究

目的：通过对比观察采用Choukroun's富血小板纤维蛋白膜(PRF膜)和采用结缔组织瓣治疗牙龈退缩的临床效果。方法：临床上选取有牙龈退缩且有意愿进行手术治疗的患者13例,分为PRF膜组和对照组,分别实施手术治疗,在术前、术后3个月测量牙周袋深度（PD）、角化龈宽度（KTW）以及牙龈退缩量,并对结果进行对照分析。结果：两组数据中牙周袋深度术前术后比较均无显著性差异（P≤0.05）;角化龈宽度和牙龈退缩量术前术后比较均有显著性差异（P≥0.05）。角化龈宽度术后比较两组之间无显著性差异（P≥0.05）;牙龈退缩量对照组小于PRF组（P≤0.05）。结论：PRF膜（富血小板纤维蛋白）治疗牙龈退缩的根面覆盖量虽不及结缔组织瓣＋冠向复位组,但对于MillerⅠ°、Ⅱ°同样可以达到很好的根面覆盖效果;且术后角化龈宽度明显增加,和膜龈组之间无显著性差异(P＞0.05)。     

上皮下结缔组织替代材料治疗牙龈退缩的临床应用

牙龈退缩在人群中有很高的发生率。它会导致牙根暴露、牙齿敏感,甚至严重影响美观。目前临床治疗牙龈退缩的金标准手术是冠向复位瓣联合上皮下结缔组织移植术,通过该手术可以明显改善牙龈退缩,但需要从腭部切取上皮下结缔组织,这是治疗时遇到的一个大问题。目前临床上已使用了许多材料来代替腭部上皮下结缔组织用来治疗牙龈退缩,本文就上皮下结缔组织的替代材料作一综述。     

隧道瓣联合结缔组织移植术治疗下前牙连续多牙牙龈退缩1例及6年随访

隧道瓣被广泛用于根面覆盖术并具有较好的可预期性;然而下前牙区由于普遍存在龈缘软组织较薄、附着龈宽度不足、异常系带牵拉、前庭沟较浅等情况, 隧道瓣应用较少。本文介绍1例下颌4颗切牙唇侧Miller Ⅲ类牙龈退缩伴非龋性牙体缺损的病例, 采用隧道瓣联合结缔组织移植术治疗, 术后随访6年, 结果显示, 一次手术获得了长期稳定的根面覆盖效果, 患者角化龈宽度和厚度同时增加, 前庭沟深度略加深, 异常系带附着被去除并获得良好的软组织美学效果;证实隧道瓣可较好地治疗下前牙区牙龈退缩并同时实现根面覆盖和角化龈增宽。     

口腔显微镜下带上皮层的结缔组织瓣移植治疗牙龈退缩的临床疗效观察

目的通过口腔显微镜下进行带上皮层的结缔组织瓣移植,进行根面覆盖来治疗牙龈退缩,观察该牙周手术的临床疗效以及显微镜应用的优越性。方法应用带上皮层的结缔组织瓣,对15例患者的20颗Miller’s I or II型颊侧大于等于3mm的牙龈退缩的患牙进行随机对照分组,分为A(口腔显微镜)组和B(常规视野)组。分析组织瓣的成活情况,在基线水平和术后6、12、18个月测量相关指标(龈退缩深度RD、根面覆盖率RC和临床附着水平CAL、牙周探诊深度PD,角化龈宽度GW,牙龈厚度GT,),并分析有可能影响龈瓣成活的各种相关因素。结果术后同一时间点上,RD、RC、CAL、GW、GT两组间比较口腔显微镜组都优于常规视野组,有统计学差异(P<0.05)。结论口腔显微镜下应用带上皮层的结缔组织瓣移植进行牙龈退缩区域的覆盖,效果安全可靠。     

上皮下结缔组织移植术治疗烤瓷冠修复后引起的牙龈退缩

目的:评价采用上皮下结缔组织移植技术治疗烤瓷冠修复后引起的牙龈退缩的疗效。方法:选取20例全身健康的患者,年龄31-58岁,接受治疗的患牙32颗。牙位选择上下颌前牙区及前磨牙区。研究对象的龈退缩的选择标准是:冠根方向烤瓷冠边缘外露,牙根面暴露2~3mm,龈退缩Miller分级为Ⅰ~Ⅱ级,唇颊面牙周探诊深度≤4mm,牙根无活动性龋或修复体。采用上皮下结缔组织移植技术覆盖根面。结果:上皮下结缔组织移植技术可以增加退缩牙龈的高度和厚度,术后根面覆盖率为85.1％。结论:采用上皮下结缔组织移植技术治疗烤瓷冠修复后牙龈退缩疗效良好,解决了患者牙龈的美学和功能问题。     

Coronally positioned flap with or without acellular dermal matrix graft in the treatment of Class I gingival recessions: a randomized controlled clinical study

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to clinically evaluate the treatment of Class I gingival recessions by coronally positioned flap with or without acellular dermal matrix allograft (ADM). METHODS: Thirteen patients with comparable bilateral Miller Class I gingival recessions (> or = 3.0 mm) were selected. The defects were randomly assigned to one of the treatments: coronally positioned flap and acellular dermal matrix (ADM group) or coronally positioned flap alone (CPF group). The clinical parameters included: probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), recession height (RH), recession width (RW), height of keratinized tissue (HKT), thickness of keratinized tissue (TKT), plaque index (PI), and gingival index (GI). The measurements were taken before the surgeries and after 6 months. RESULTS: The mean baseline recession was 3.4 mm and 3.5 mm for ADM group and CPF group, respectively. After 6 months, both treatments resulted in significant root coverage (P < 0.01), reaching an average of 2.6 mm (76%) in the ADM group and 2.5 mm (71%) in the CPF group. The difference in recession reduction between treatments was not statistically significant. There were no statistically significant differences between the treatments in PD, CAL, RH, RW, and HKT. However, the mean TKT gain was 0.7 mm for the ADM group and 0.2 mm for the CPF group (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: It can be concluded that both techniques could provide significant root coverage in Class I gingival recessions; however, a greater keratinized tissue thickness can be expected with ADM.     

Enamel matrix derivative and coronal flaps to cover marginal tissue recessions

BACKGROUND: Correcting recession defects is one of the goals of periodontal therapy, and the efficacy and predictability of the various techniques are important considerations for both patients and clinicians. Several reports have examined the outcome of gingival recession treatment by means of coronally positioned flaps (CPF) and enamel matrix derivative (EMD). The purpose of this study was to clinically evaluate the use of EMD in association with CPF to cover localized gingival recessions compared to CPF alone. METHODS: Twenty-two patients with Miller Class I or II gingival recessions >2 mm were included. One recession from each patient was treated in the study. Two treatments were randomly assigned: coronally positioned flap with EMD (test) and coronally positioned flap alone (control). Clinical parameters measured at baseline and 1, 6, and 12 months included gingival index, plaque index, probing depth, clinical attachment level, vertical and horizontal recession, and width of keratinized gingiva. RESULTS: At 12 months, both treatment modalities showed significant root coverage, gain in clinical attachment, and gain in width of keratinized gingiva (P <0.05). Vertical recessions were reduced from 2.68 +/- 1.63 mm to 0.36 +/- 0.60 mm in the test group and from 2.31 +/- 1.52 mm to 0.90 +/- 0.95 mm in the control group. Horizontal recessions decreased from 4.27 +/- 2.06 mm to 0.77 +/- 0.87 mm in the test group and from 3.68 +/- 1.91 mm to 1.72 +/- 1.31 mm in the control group. Changes in keratinized gingiva went from 3.81 +/- 1.95 mm to 4.63 +/- 2.15 mm in the test group and from 3.31 +/- 1.81 mm to 3.27 +/- 1.80 mm in the control group. When both treatments were compared at 12 months, there was a significant difference in vertical tooth coverage and gain in keratinized gingiva in favor of the experimental group (P <0.05). The average percentage of root coverage for test and control groups was 88.6% and 62.2%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The coronally positioned flap alone or with EMD is an effective procedure to cover localized gingival recessions. The addition of EMD significantly improves the amount of root coverage.     

The clinical effect of acellular dermal matrix on gingival thickness and root coverage compared to coronally positioned flap alone

BACKGROUND: The primary aim of this randomized, controlled, blinded, clinical investigation was to compare the coronally positioned flap (CPF) plus an acellular dermal matrix (ADM) allograft to CPF alone to determine their effect on gingival thickness and percent root coverage. METHODS: Twenty-four subjects with one Miller Class I or II buccal recession defect of > or = 3 mm were treated with a CPF plus ADM or a CPF alone. Multiple additional recession sites were treated with the same flap procedure, and all sites were studied for 6 months. Tissue thickness was measured at the sulcus base and at the mucogingival junction of all teeth, with an SDM ultrasonic gingival thickness meter. RESULTS: For the ADM sites, mean initial recession of 3.46 mm was reduced to 0.04 mm for defect coverage of 3.42 mm or 99% (P < 0.05). For the CPF group, mean initial recession of 3.27 mm was reduced to 1.08 mm for defect coverage of 2.19 mm or 67% (P < 0.05). The difference between ADM and CPF groups was statistically significant (P < 0.05). Marginal soft-tissue thickness was increased by 0.40 mm (P < 0.05) for the ADM group, whereas the CPF group remained essentially unchanged. Keratinized tissue was increased for the ADM group by 0.81 mm (P < 0.05), whereas the CPF group increased by 0.33 mm (P > 0.05). No additional root coverage was gained due to creeping attachment between 2 and 6 months for either group. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with a CPF plus an ADM allograft significantly increased gingival thickness when compared with a CPF alone. Recession defect coverage was significantly improved with the use of ADM.     

Root coverage using the coronally positioned flap with or without a subepithelial connective tissue graft

BACKGROUND: Various surgical techniques have been proposed for treating gingival recession. This randomized clinical trial compared the coronally positioned flap (CPF) alone or in conjunction with a subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) in the treatment of gingival recession. METHODS: Eleven non-smoking subjects with bilateral and comparable Miller Class I recession defects were selected. The defects, at least 3.0 mm deep, were randomly assigned to the test (CPF + SCTG) or control group (CPF alone). Recession depth (RD), probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), width of keratinized tissue (KT), and gingival/mucosal thickness (GT) were assessed at baseline and 6 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Recession depth was significantly reduced 6 months postoperatively (P<0.05) for both groups. Mean root coverage was 75% and 69% in the test and control groups, respectively. There were no significant differences between the two groups in RD, PD, or CAL, either at baseline or at 6 months postoperatively. However, at 6 months postoperatively, the test group showed a statistically significant increase in KT and GT compared to the control group (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that both surgical approaches are effective in addressing root coverage. However, when an increase in gingival dimensions (keratinized tissue width, gingival/mucosal thickness) is a desired outcome, then the combined technique (CPF + SCTG) should be used.     

A patient-centered clinical evaluation of acellular dermal matrix graft in the treatment of gingival recession defects

BACKGROUND: The present randomized controlled trial was conducted to evaluate acellular dermal matrix (ADM) graft in terms of patient satisfaction and its effectiveness and efficiency in the treatment of gingival recession. METHODS: Fourteen patients (seven males and seven females) with Miller Class I and II recessions > or =3 mm participated in this 6-month clinical study. They were assigned randomly to the ADM group (ADM graft and coronally positioned flap [CPF]) or the CPF group (CPF alone). Results were evaluated based on parameters measuring patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes associated with the two treatment procedures. Significance was set at P <0.05. RESULTS: The mean recession was 4.0 +/- 1.0 mm and 3.7 +/- 0.7 mm for the ADM and CPF groups, respectively. For the ADM group, the defect coverage was 3.85 +/- 0.89 mm or 97.14% compared to the CPF group, in which the defect coverage was 2.85 +/- 0.89 mm or 77.42%. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P <0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in the remaining clinical parameters and overall patient satisfaction except in criteria related to patient comfort and cost effectiveness, in which CPF alone produced significantly better results (P <0.03). CONCLUSIONS: ADM graft is significantly superior with regard to effectiveness and efficiency in the treatment of gingival recession than CPF alone. CPF emerges as a better option than ADM graft in terms of cost effectiveness and patient comfort.     

Coronally positioned flap with or without acellular dermal matrix graft in the treatment of class II gingival recession defects: A randomized controlled clinical study

The aim of the randomized controlled single blind study is to evaluate the treatment of Miller's class II gingival recessions by coronally positioned flap (CPF) with or without acellular dermal matrix allograft (ADMA). Ten patients with 20 sites with maxillary bilateral Miller's class II facial recession defects were selected randomly into two groups of test (ADMA+CPF) and control (CPF alone) group with each group having 10 recession defects to be treated. The clinical parameters included plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), probing pocket depth (PPD), clinical attachment level (CAL), recession height (RH), recession width (RW), height of the keratinized tissue (HKT), and thickness of the keratinized tissue (TKT). These measurements were recorded at baseline and after 6 months post-surgery. Statistical analysis was made by the paired "t" test for intragroup and intergroup comparison was done by the unpaired "t" test. The percentage of root coverage for both the experimental and control groups were 82.2% and 50%, respectively. The changes from baseline to 6 months were significant in both the groups for PD, CAL, and RH; however, for parameters such as RW, HKT, and TKT significance was seen only in the experimental group. On comparison between two groups, only TKT showed statistically significance. It can be concluded that the amount of root coverage obtained with ADMA + CPF was superior compared to CPF alone.     

Laterally positioned flap along with acellular dermal matrix graft in the management of maxillary localized recessions

Objectives

The aim of this study was to evaluate acellular dermal matrix graft (ADM) combination with laterally positioned flap (LPF) and to compare the results with LPF alone in terms of root coverage, esthetics, and patient perspectives in gingival recessions.

Materials and methods

Twenty-two patients with localized Miller Class I/II recessions ≥ 3 mm with gingival thickness (GT) < 0.8 mm were included. Outcome parameters such as recession height and width, keratinized tissue (KT) height, GT, mean and complete defect coverage, patient satisfaction, and root coverage esthetic score (RES) were re-evaluated at 12 months postoperatively.

Results

Mean and complete defect coverage were 94.80 and 72.73% in LPF+ADM group and 77.25 and 45.45% in LPF group, respectively. Significant differences were observed for KT and GT gain, patient satisfaction, and RES in favor of LPF group (p < 0.05). A significant positive correlation was established between GT and mean defect coverage (r = 0.448; p < 0.05).

Conclusion

LPF is a successful approach in the treatment of localized Miller I/II gingival recessions. On the other hand, when thin donor tissue was thickened with an allogenic graft, more successful results regarding complete defect coverage, patient satisfaction, and RES were obtained.

Clinical relevance

Increase in gingival thickness and keratinized tissue height represents critical improvements in the prognosis of the advanced localized recessions and will be beneficial for patient’s periodontal health and esthetics. Both approaches can be used successfully as an alternative for soft tissue root coverage in specific localized cases with a limited amount of keratinized tissue apical to the defect.

     

Treatment of localized gingival recessions. Part II. Coronally repositioned flap with a free gingival graft.

Fourteen teeth with localized gingival recessions were treated using a coronally repositioned flap with a free gingival graft (Bernimoulin, 1973). The second step of the procedure was performed 1 month after the free gingival graft was done. Clinical measurements of the recession, sulcus depth and keratinized gingiva were taken preoperatively and at 30, 90 and 180 days after surgery. A mean reduction in the recession of 2.73 mm was obtained after 6 months, which was equivalent to a 64% decrease of the original recession. A significant increase in the width of the keratinized gingiva, averaging 3.27 mm, was found after 6 months. All results remained stable after 30 days postoperatively. The values for gingival recession, sulcus depth and width of keratinized gingiva on the teeth adjacent to the recessions remained unchanged, since they were undisturbed by the procedure.     

Coronally positioned flap with or without acellular dermal matrix graft in gingival recessions: a histometric study

PURPOSE: To evaluate, histometrically, the healing of gingival recession treated by coronally positioned flaps (CPF) with or without acellular dermal matrix (ADM) as a subepithelial graft. METHODS: Gingival recessions were created on the upper cuspids of six dogs and were randomly assigned to: CPF+ADM (ADM group) or CPF alone (CPF group). After 4 months, the dogs were sacrificed, and the histometric measurements were performed. RESULTS: The epithelial length was 2.28 + 0.92 mm and 2.10 + 0.46 mm for the ADM and CPF groups, respectively (P=0.74). The connective tissue adaptation was 0.05 + 0.08 mm for the ADM group and 0.06 + 0.08 mm for the CPF group (P=0.36). The new cementum was 2.35 + 1.55 mm and 2.90 + 0.96 mm in the ADM and CPF groups, respectively (P=0.53). The new bone was 0.60 + 1.36 mm for the ADM group and 0.35 + 0.82 mm for the CPF group (P=0.53). The gingival recession was -0.88 + 1.33 mm in the ADM group and -0.21 + 0.22 mm in the CPF group (P=0.21). The gingival thickness was 1.63 + 0.28 mm in the ADM group and 1.16 + 0.20 mm in the CPF group (P=0.002).