Successful root coverage for single or multiple teeth can be achieved with a minimally invasive tunneling technique and acellular derail matrix (Alloderm®).
Presentation given by Dr. Edward Gottesman, periodontist in New York, New York at the American Academy of Periondontology Meeting in San Francisco in September, 2014.
Visit http://perionyc.com for more information.
Call Girls Kolkata Kalikapur 💯Call Us 🔝 8005736733 🔝 💃 Top Class Call Girl Se...
Minimally Invasive Surgery & Acellular Dermal Matrix to Correct Gingival Recession
1. MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY & ACELLULAR
DERMAL MATRIX TO CORRECT
GINGIVAL RECESSION
EDWARD GOTTESMAN, DDS
DIPLOMATE, AMERICAN BOARD OF PERIODONTOLOGY
CLINICAL ASSISTANT PROFESSOR,
SCHOOL OF DENTAL MEDICINE @ STONY BROOK
2. •I am receiving an honorarium from BIOHORIZONS
•I have no financial interests in any of the materials used or the procedures being
presented
•the patient cases to be presented are all from my private practice in NYC
DISCLOSURE
3. •provide an evidence based review of the tunneling technique in the context of
minimally invasive surgery combined with acellular dermal matrix to achieve
predictable root coverage for multiple teeth with gingival recession.
OBJECTIVE
4. GINGIVAL RECESSION DEFINED
• an acquired deformity of the gingival marginal tissue displaced
apical to the cementoenamel (CEJ), resulting in exposed root
surface and loss of attached gingiva
5. • Class 3: REC past MGJ, IP
bone or papilla loss,
malposition, partial coverage
• Class 4: REC past MGJ,
severe IP bone or papilla
loss, malposition, no
• Class 1: REC not to MGJ,
no IP bone or papilla loss,
100% coverage
• Class 2: REC past MGJ, no
IP bone or papilla loss,
100% coverage
GINGIVAL RECESSION CLASSIFICATION
6. GINGIVAL RECESSION PREVALENCE
• common in the US: 23.8 million people (22.5%) in the U.S. above the age of 29 have ≥3
mm gingival recession
• prevalence, extent and severity increases with age
• males > females
• blacks > whites and Mexican Americans
• more prevalent and severe at facial surfaces of teeth compared to mesial surfaces
• most prevalent for maxillary first molars and mandibular central incisors
7. 58
41
22
13
6
0
15
30
45
60
75
1 2 3 4 5
Prevalence of Recession % In US >30
18
30
40
46
60
0
15
30
45
60
75
40 50 60 70 80
Recession Prevalence (%) by Age
Recession (mm) Age
60% of 80 year olds have recession58% of population have at least 1mm of recession
RECESSION PREVALENCE AND AGE
8. ⬆︎ RECESSION PREVALENCE ➤⬆︎TX DEMAND
• since sites with previous recession are prone to additional recession, the
aging U.S. population may have a large number of sites that may need
root coverage grafting
9. GINGIVAL RECESSION RISK FACTORS
• areas with previous recession
• thin marginal gingiva phenotype (biotype)(Müller and Eger)
• inflammation, poor OH, improper OH habits, tooth position
and root shape (Albander et al.)
12. ANATOMIC FACTORS THAT
PREDISPOSE TO RECESSION
• “thin” gingival biotype (Baldi)
• proclination or rotation of teeth (Nyman)
• presence of bone fenestration or dehiscence (Lang
and Löe)
13. “I WANT COMPLETE ROOT COVERAGE!”
• Complete root coverage is the most important outcome in
patients with esthetic requests (Consensus report, 1996)
14. GOAL OF ROOT COVERAGE
• Rasperini concluded that the goal of root coverage is
complete resolution of the recession defect and an optimal
esthetic outcome
15. HOW IS RECESSION MEASURED
• identify CEJ
• distance from CEJ to the most apical extension of GM
16. PATIENT PERCEIVES ESTHETIC FAILURE
• very often the most coronal millimeter of the root exposure is the
only visible part of the recession when the patient smiles;
therefore, its persistence after therapy, even of a shallow
recession, may be considered an esthetic failure
18. ADDITIONAL GOALS OF ROOT COVERAGE
• thin biotype ⤼ thicker biotype ⇒↓risk of further recession
• ↓ root sensitivity
• ↓ risk of root caries
• ↑ interproximal papillary height (volume)
19. ↓PREDICTABILITY VS. ↑SUCCESS OF ROOT COVERAGE
• root coverage procedures are successful but not very predictable
• Success of root coverage procedures is related to the average percentage of
root coverage achieved, (≈86% for ADM, Giannobile W, et al.) whereas
predictability describes the percentage of the treated teeth in which complete
root coverage is achieved.
20. CRITICAL RECESSION <4MM
• better results in terms of percentages of complete and mean root
coverage can be expected when baseline recession defects are <4 mm
21. + FGG: Coronal advancement of previously placed free
gingival grafts
+ SECT graft: Gingival grafting performed in conjunction with
flap
advancement for submersion (multiple variations)
+ biomaterials (ADM, EMP, Platelet rich fibrin membrane,
collagen matrix)
+ Guided Tissue Regeneration (GTR)
THERAPEUTIC APPROACHES TO ROOT COVERAGE
FOR GINGIVAL RECESSION DEFECTS
• FGG: Gingival grafts placed directly over the root
surface
• Pedical flap (repositioning of “adjacent” attached
gingiva)
• lateral sliding flap
• double papilla flap
• semilunar coronally repositioned flap
22. • the subepithelial connective tissue graft technique is considered to be the gold
standard for gingival recession therapy
• however, given the reluctance of patients to have additional surgical sites,
potentially greater patient discomfort, limitation of adequate donor tissue, and
increased surgical time we have turned to allograft substitutes
IS SCTG STILL THE “GOLD STANDARD”?
23. DISADVANTAGES OF SCTG• requires second surgical site
• longer procedure
• increased risk of post-op complications (ie.
discomfort)
• limited available donor supply therefore
limiting the number of teeth that can be treated
in a single surgery
24. CURRENT GRAFT PRODUCTS AVAILABLE FOR ROOT COVERAGE
• LifeCell - Alloderm® (Allograft)
• Geistlich - Mucograft® (Xenograft)
• Densply - Perioderm® (Allograft)
• Zimmer - Puros® Dermis
(Allograft)
25. WHAT IS ADMG ?
• obtained from a human donor skin tissue process that removes its cell components
while preserving the remaining bioactive components and the extracellular matrix,
which is subsequently freeze dried
• avascular and acellular material (its a non-vital structure)
• exhibits undamaged collagen and elastin matrices that function as a scaffold to allow
ingrowth by host tissues
26. • Scarano and coworkers microscopically analyzed healing ADM graft sites
using graft specimens before the surgery and 4 min and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 10
weeks after grafting
• The 6-month outcome of this study revealed that the amount of root
coverage achieved with ADM and a tunnel approach to treat multiple Miller
Class I recessions was 100%.
• the periodontal tissues exhibited a biotype conversion with overall increase in
thickness
• ADM was substituted and completely re-epithelialized in 10 weeks according
ADM GRAFTS HEAL ⩬ AUTOGENOUS GRAFTS
27. ADM ⩬ SCTG FOR MEASURED OUTCOMES
• In 2005, a meta-analysis by Wang et al. of eight randomly controlled clinical
trials showed no statistically significant differences between groups (ADM and
CTG) for measured outcomes:
• recession coverage
• keratinized tissue (KT)
• probing depth (PD)
• clinical attachment levels
28. ADVANTAGES OF ADMG
• safe and biocompatible (equivalent to gold standard SCTG)
• unlimited supply, so multiple sites can therefore be treated with a single
procedure (sextant, quadrant, full arch) avoiding second surgical site - less
morbidity
• excellent tissue color match obtained as the graft is repopulated with the
recipient’s cells
• good track record with favorable outcomes reported in the literature*
29. DISADVANTAGES OF ADMG
• Pini Prato et al. reported that the graft must remain completely
covered (need primary closure); avoiding graft exposure is
essential when an avascular graft such as ADMG is used
• requires tensionless flap to avoid graft exposure during post-
operative period to enhance root coverage outcome
30. ANATOMIC FACTORS AFFECTING ROOT COVERAGE SUCCESS
• Miller class and interdental papilla height (Rasperini et al.)
• a thin buccal plate provides less a blood supply to nourish the overlying flap as well as graft
(Ciancio)
• labial protrusions of roots (tooth position) combined with a thin bony plate are predisposing factors
for fenestration and dehiscence, which can also complicate the outcome of recession coverage
therapy (Pandit et al. and Hirschfeld)
• frenulum insertions
31. SURGICAL FACTORS AFFECTING ROOT COVERAGE
SUCCESS1. post-suturing positioning of the flap coronal to the CEJ may contribute to better outcomes (Pini Prato et al. and Zuccelli et al.)
2. flap thickness ⇡ root coverage (Wang & Hwang, Baldi et al. and many others)
• thick gingival tissues eases manipulation, maintains vascularity, and promotes wound healing during and after surgery
3. ↑ flap tension ⇣ root coverage (Pini Prato and Tinti)
4. ↑ flap dimension when performing root coverage for multiple rather than a single tooth, the larger flap dimension may favor
complete root coverage because of increased stability (Zuccelli)
5. extending the flap margin to uninvolved neighboring teeth may blend things in more naturally (Zuccelli et al.)
6. Verical incisons according to Zuccelli and many others may have a true negative impact on the clinical and esthetic outcomes of a
root-coverage surgical procedure, however the negative impact on the clinical and esthetic outcomes of a root-coverage surgical
32. • VRIs could damage the lateral blood supply to the flap and might result in unaesthetic visible white scars (AKA
keloids) (Zucchelli & Desanctis)
• greater incidence of swelling, pain, and bleeding: poorer patient morbidity of the patients treated with VRIs
(Zucchelli & Desanctis)
• VRI’s to coronally advance a flap may reduce blood circulation at the graft site
• lateral and papillary areas may play an important role in flap perfusion and graft revascularization
• the greater surgical time to complete the CAF with VRIs may be responsible for greater incidence of swelling
and pain in patients treated with this surgical approachn (Coretellini et al.)
AVOID VERTICAL RELEASING INCISIONS!
33. FLAP DESIGN FOR GOOD BLOOD SUPPLY
• Mörmann and Ciancio investigated changes in gingival and alveolar mucosa microcirculation following different
surgical incisions or flaps in a fluorescein angiographic study
• they determined that when designing flaps with vertical releasing incisions:
1. flaps should be broad enough at their base to include major gingival vessels
2. a flap's length to width ratio should not exceed 2:1
3. minimal tension should be produced by suturing techniques and the tissue should be managed gently during the
surgical procedure
4. partial thickness flap preparations to cover avascular areas should not be too thin so that more blood vessels
are included in them
34. • overcorrection can decrease post-operatory exposure of non-vital
allografts such as ADMG
• controlling the exact position of ADMG, 1 mm apical to the CEJ,
after the flap is sutured may be difficult, but the position before the
flap is sutured is a valuable prerequisite to achieve a better root
coverage outcome
OVERCORRECTION FOR SUCCESSFUL
ROOT COVERAGE
thank Dr. Lorenzano for the kind introduction
thank the AAP for inviting me to speak with you today,
i feel very honored to share the podium with Dr. Rindler and Zuccelli
my topic is…
but i wouldn't quite my day job
otherwise i might just quit my day job
my day job
incl. full arch or full mouth
American Academy of Periodontology. Glossary of Periodontal Terms, 4th edition. Chicago: American Academy of Periodontology; 2001.
Miller PD, IJPRD 1985 devised a landmark classification system for recession where he correlated predictability of RC with exam findings
A landmark classification of recession was given by Miller in 1985 who enhanced the predictability of root coverage by presurgical examination and its correlation with the recession, although this classification did not include the position of the tooth (proclination/rotation), thickness of overlying gingiva, and alveolar ridge.
how prevalent is GR? according to Albander prevalence studies….
therefore, appropriate measures of prevention or control of GR are desirable
Prevalence: the proportion of individuals affected by a disease at a specific point in time
Albander JM, Kingman A. Gingival recession, gingival bleeding, and dental calculus in adults 30 years of age and older in the United States, 1998-1994. J Periodontol 1999;70:30-43.
majority of population has 1 mm recession
trends:
1. GR prevalence decreases with severity
2. GR prevalence increases with aging
high GR prevalence can keep us clinicians busy!
1. Müller HP, Eger T. Gingival phenotypes in young male adults. J Clin Periodontol 1997;24:65-71.
2. Müller HP, Eger T. Masticatory mucosa and periodontal phenotype: A review. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2002;22:172-183.
Risk Factor: An environmental, behavioral, or biologic factor confirmed by temporal sequence, which, if present, directly increases the probability of a disease occurring, and if absent or removed, reduces that probability.
1. Müller HP, Eger T. Gingival phenotypes in young male adults. J Clin Periodontol 1997;24:65-71.
2. Müller HP, Eger T. Masticatory mucosa and periodontal phenotype: A review. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2002;22:172-183.
Risk Indicator: A probable or putative risk factor, often detected in cross-sectional studies, that has not yet been confirmed by longitudinal studies.
it behooves us as clinicians to find the real cause of GR but often our attempts are futile because often there are numerous causes and contributing variables acting simultaneously
Baldi C, Pini-Prato G, Pagliaro U, et al. Coronally advanced flap procedure for root coverage. Is flap thickness a relevant predictor to achieve root coverage? A 19 case series. J Periodontol 1999;70:1077- 1084.
Ingervall B, Jacobsson U, Nyman S. A clinical study of the relationship between crowding of teeth, plaque and gingival condition. J Clin Periodontol 1977;4:214-222.
Lang NP, Löe H. The relationship between the width of keratinized gingiva and gingival health. J Periodontol 1972;43:623-627.
daunting and challenging request
Consensus report, 1996
Consensus report. Periodontal regeneration around natural teeth. Ann Periodontol 1996;1:667-701.
certainly the goal is “COMPLETE” root coverage
Rasperini G, Acunzo R, Limiroli E. Decision Making in Gingival Recession Treatment: Scientific Evidence and Clinical Experience, Clin Advances in Periodontics 2011;1:41-52.
may seem trivial but CEJ not clear when NCCL’s are present
Zucchelli and De Sanctis reported that ….
Zucchelli G, De Sanctis M. Treatment of multiple recession-type defects in patients with esthetic demands. J Periodontol 2000;71:1506-1514.
8 years post-op of tx max GR case
pt may perceive this a failure
1-2 mm or erosion/abrasion/abfraction/NCCL
Zucchelli G, De Sanctis M. Treatment of multiple recession-type defects in patients with esthetic demands. J Periodontol 2000;71:1506-1514.
Pini Prato, Zuchelli and Wennström, reported that…
Wennström JL, Zuchelli G, Pini Prato GP. Mucogingival Therapy — Periodontal Plastic Surgery. In: Lindhe J, Lang N, Karring T eds. Clinical Periodontology and Implant Dentistry, 5th ed. Oxford: Blackwell Munksgaard; 2008:955-1028.
Greenwell H, Fiorellini J, Giannobile W, et al. Oral reconstructive and corrective considerations in periodontal therapy. J Periodontol 2005;76:1588-1600.
Chambrone and Chambrone reported that …..
Chambrone LA, Chambrone L. Treatment of Miller Class I and II localized recession defects using laterally positioned flaps. A 24-month study. Am J Dent 2009;22:339-344.
Sullivan HC, Atkins JH. Free autogenous gingival grafts. I. Principles of successful grafting. Periodontics 1968;6:121-129.
Harvey PM. Management of advanced periodontitis. I. Preliminary report of a method of surgical reconstruction. N Z Dent J 1965;61:180-187.
Langer B, Langer L. Subepithelial connective tissue graft technique for root coverage. J Periodontol 1985; 56:715-720.
Grupe HE. Modified technique for the sliding flap operation. J Periodontol 1966;37:491-495.
Cohen DW, Ross SE. The double papillae repositioned flap in periodontal therapy. J Periodontol 1968;39: 65-70.
Tarnow DP. Semilunar coronally repositioned flap. J Clin Periodontol 1986;13:182-185.
Pini Prato G,Tinti C,Vincenzi G,Magnani C,Cortellini P, Clauser C. Guided tissue regeneration versus mucogingival surgery in the treatment of human buccal gingival recession. J Periodontol 1992;63:919-928.
Sipe JD. Tissue engineering and reparative medicine. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2002;961:1-9.
Taba M Jr., Jin Q, Sugai JV, Giannobile WV. Current concepts in periodontal bioengineering. Orthod Craniofac Res 2005;8:292-302.
Maia LP, Novaes AB Jr, Souza SL, Grisi MF, Taba M Jr., Palioto DB. In Vitro Evaluation of acellular dermal matrix as a three-dimensional scaffold for gingival fibroblast seeding. J Periodontol 2001;82:293-301.
Miller PD Jr. Root coverage using a free soft tissue autograft following citric acid application. Part 1: Tech- nique. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1982;2:65-70.
Holbrook T, Ochsenbein C. Complete coverage of the denuded root surface with a one-stage gingival graft. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1983;3:8-27.
Grupe HE, Warren RF. Repair of gingival defects by a sliding flap operation. J Periodontol 1956;27:92-95.
Pfeifer JS, Heller R. Histologic evaluation of full and partial thickness lateral repositioned flaps: A pilot study. J Periodontol 1971;42:331-333.
Allen EP, Miller PD Jr. Coronal positioning of existing gingiva: Short term results in the treatment of shallow marginal tissue recession. J Periodontol 1989;60:316-319.
Tarnow DP. Semilunar coronally repositioned flap. J Clin Periodontol 1986;13:182-185.
Maynard JG Jr. Coronal positioning of a previously placed autogenous gingival graft. J Periodontol 1977; 48:151-155.
Bernimoulin JP, Lu ̈scher B, Mu ̈hlemann HR. Coronally repositioned periodontal flap. Clinical evaluation after one year. J Clin Periodontol 1975;2:1-13.
Tinti C, Vincenzi GP, Cortellini P, Pini Prato G, Clauser C. Guided tissue regeneration in the treatment of human facial recession. A 12-case report. J Periodontol 1992;63:554-560.
Prato GP, Clauser C, Magnani C, Cortellini P. Resorbable membrane in the treatment of human buccal recession: A nine-case report. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1995;15:258-267.
Roccuzzo M, Lungo M, Corrente G, Gandolfo S. Comparative study of a bioresorbable and a non-resorbable membrane in the treatment of human buccal gingival recessions. J Periodontol 1996;67:7-14.
according to Chambrone et al., Wennström and Nilvéus
1. Chambrone L, Chambrone D, Pustiglioni FE, Chambrone LA, Lima LA. Can
subepithelial connective tissue grafts be considered the gold standard procedure in the treatment of Miller Class I and II recession-type defects? J Dent 2008;36:659-671.
2. Wennström JL. Mucogingival therapy. Ann Periodontol 1996;1:671-701.
3. Bouchard P, Etienne D, Ouhayoun JP, Nilvéus R. Subepithelial connective tissue grafts in the treatment of gingival recessions. A comparative study of 2 procedures. J Periodontol 1994;65:929-936.
4. Harris RJ. The connective tissue and partial thick- ness double pedicle graft: A predictable method of obtaining root coverage. J Periodontol 1992;63:477- 486.
5. Allen AL. Use of the supraperiosteal envelope in soft tissue grafting for root coverage. I. Rationale and technique. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1994; 14:216-227.
Limitations of autogenous CT grafts which have led to the search for non-autogenous substitutes for palatal tissue
Roman A, Balazsi R, Campian RS, et al. Patient-centered outcomes after subepithelial connective tissue grafts and coronally advanced flaps. Quintessence international 2012;43:841-851. (http://qi.quintessenz.de/index.php?doc=abstract&abstractID=28464/)
Objective: The use of a coronally advanced flap (CAF) and connective tissue graft (CTG) is a well-established procedure to cover single and multiple recessions and improve soft tissue esthetics. However, until now, there are still limited data evaluating patient morbidity, the fear of imminent tooth loss, and modification of sensitivity in surgical areas. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the patient-centered outcomes associated with CAF + CTG.
Method and Materials: Thirty-four patients (mean age, 30.76 ± 6.88 years) with single or multiple Class I and II gingival recessions were treated using a CAF + CTG. The following parameters were evaluated at 14 days and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery: esthetics, root hypersensitivity, fear of imminent tooth loss, daily activities or nutritional habits, and the levels of postsurgical morbidities. A visual analog scale was used to evaluate patient-centered outcomes. The percentage of patients belonging to each of the severity scales, the mean values associated with each parameter, and the statistical significance of the modification of the monitored parameters were calculated. The parametric F (Fisher) test and the least significant difference post hoc pair-wise comparisons were computed.
Results: There were statistically significant differences between baseline and all follow-up time points in root hypersensitivity and in fear of tooth loss. Preoperative prevalence of fear of tooth loss was 99%. Esthetics were statistically significantly improved at the 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-month visits compared with the evaluation at 14 days. No palatal bleeding was recorded. The pain perception in the donor area was mild: Only 3% of patients reported severe palatal pain, and the mean VAS score for palatal pain was 3.79 ± 1.49.
Conclusion: Treatment of single and multiple gingival recessions with CAF + CTG resulted in predictable improvements of soft tissue esthetics and root hypersensitivity but was associated with a slight increase in patient morbidity, mainly related to the harvesting of CTG. This should be considered when treating patients with esthetic demands.
1. Silverstein LH, Callan DP. An acellular dermal matrix allograft substitute for palatal donor tissue. Postgrad Dent 1996;3:14-21.
2. Schulman J. Clinical evolution of an acellular dermal allograft for increasing the zone of attached gingiva. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 1996;8:201-208.
3. Batista EL Jr, Batista FC, Novaes AB Jr. Management of soft tissue ridge deformities with acellular dermal matrix. Clinical approach and outcome after 6 months of treatment. J Periodontol 2001;72:265-273.
4. Harris RJ. Root coverage with a connective tissue with partial thickness double pedicle and an acellular dermal matrix graft: A clinical and histological evaluation of a case report. J Periodontol 1998;69:1305-1311.
5. Dodge JR, Henderson R, Greenwell H. Root coverage without a palatal donor site, using an acellular dermal graft. Periodontal Insights 1998;5:5-9.
6. Tal H. Subgingival acellular dermal matrix allograft for the treatment of gingival recession: A case report. J Periodontol 1999;70:1118-1124.
7. Aichelmann-Reidy ME, Yukna RA, Evans GH, Nasr HF, Mayer ET. Clinical evaluation of acellular allograft dermis for the treatment of human gingival recession. J Periodontol 2001;72:998-1005.
8. Novaes AB Jr, Grisi DC, Molina GO, Souza SLS, Taba M Jr, Grisi MFM. Comparative 6-month clinical study of a subepithelial connective tissue graft and acellular dermal matrix graft for the treatment of gingival recession. J Periodontol 2001;72:1477-1484.
9. Harris RJ. A comparative study of root coverage obtained with an acellular dermal matrix versus a connective tissue graft:Results of 107 recession defects in 50 consecutively treated patients. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2000;20:51-59.
10. Tal H, Moses O, Zohar R, Meir H, Nemcovsky C. Root coverage of advanced gingival recession: A comparative study between acellular dermal matrix allograft and subepithelial connective tissue grafts. J Periodontol 2002;73: 1405-1411.
11. Harris RJ. A comparison of root coverage obtained with a connective tissue graft versus an acellular dermal matrix. J Periodontol 1999;70:235 (Abstr.).
12. Harris RJ. Cellular dermal matrix used for root cover- age: 18-month follow-up observation. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2002;22:156-163.
13. Aichelmann-Reidy MB, Yukna RA, Mayer ET. An acellular dermal matrix used for root coverage. J Periodontol 1999;70:223 (Abstr.).
14. Greenwell H, Fiorellini J, Giannobile W, et al. Oral reconstructive and corrective considerations in periodontal therapy. J Periodontol 2005;76:1588-1600.
15. Gapski R, Parks CA, Wang HL. Acellular dermal matrix for mucogingival surgery: A meta-analysis. J Periodontol 2005;76:1814-1822.
16. Hirsch A, Goldstein M, Goultschin J, Boyan BD, Schwartz Z. A 2-year follow-up of root coverage using sub-pedicle acellular dermal matrix allografts and sub- epithelial connective tissue autografts. J Periodontol 2005;76:1323-1328.
17. Núñez J, Caffesse R, Vignoletti F, Guerra F, San Roman F, Sanz M. Clinical and histological evaluation of an acellular dermal matrix allograft in combination with the coronally advanced flap in the treatment of Miller class I recession defects: An experimental study in the mini-pig. J Clin Periodontol 2009;36:523-531.
1. Scarano A, Barros R, Iezzi G, Piattelli A. Acellular Dermal Matrix Graft for Gingival Augmentation: A Preliminary Clinical, Histologic, and Ultrastructural Evaluation. J Periodontol 2009;80:253-259.
2. Sullivan HC, Atkins JH. Free autogenous gingival grafts. I. Principles of successful grafting. Periodontics 1968;6:121-129.
3. Soehren SE, Allen AL, Cutright DE, Seibert JS. Clinical and histologic studies of donor tissues utilized for free grafts of masticatory mucosa. J Periodontol 1973;44:727-741.
ADM peformed similar to SCTG for measured outcomes
Gapski R, Parks CA, Wang HL. Acellular dermal matrix for mucogingival surgery: A meta-analysis. J Periodontol 2005;76:1814-1822.
* Gapski R, Parks CA, Wang H-L. Acellular dermal matrix for mucogingival surgery: a meta-analysis. J Periodontol 2005;76:1814-1822.
Pini Prato GP, Baldi C, Nieri M, et al. Coronally advanced flap: the post-surgical position of the gingival margin is an important factor for achieving complete root coverage. J Periodontol 2005:76:713-722.
1. Pandit N, Gaba A, Malik R, Pandit IK. A New Index Proposed for Determination of Outcome of Recession Coverage Procedures. Clin Adv Periodontics 2012;2:1:49-55.
2. Hirschfeld I. A study of skulls in the American Museum of Natural History in relation to periodontal disease. J Dent Res 1923;5:241-265.
3. Mörmann W, Ciancio SG. Blood supply of human gingiva following periodontal surgery. A fluorescein angiographic study. J Periodontol 1977;48:681-692.
4. parameters of care JOP 2000, 71, 861-862
5. Rasperini G, Acunzo R, Limiroli E. Decision Making in Gingival Recession Treatment: Scientific Evidence and Clinical Experience, Clin Advances in Periodontics 2011;1:41-52.
Zucchelli G, Mele M, Mazzotti C, Marzadori M, Montebugnoli L, De Sanctis M. Coronally advanced flap with and without vertical releasing incisions for the treatment of multiple gingival recessions: A comparative controlled randomized clinical trial. J Periodontol 2009;80:1083-1094.
Zucchelli G, Mele M, Mazzotti C, Marzadori M, Montebugnoli L, De Sanctis M. Coronally advanced flap with and without vertical releasing incisions for the treatment of multiple gingival recessions: A comparative controlled randomized clinical trial. J Periodontol 2009;80:1083-1094.
1. Mörmann W, Meier C, Firestone A. Gingival blood circulation after experimental wounds in man. J Clin Periodontol 1979;6:417-424.
2. Kleinheinz J, Büchter A, Kruse-Lösler B, Weingart D, Joos U. Incision design in implant dentistry based on vascularization of the mucosa. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005;16:518-523.
3. Bruno JF. Connective tissue graft technique assuring wide root coverage. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1994;14:126-137.
4. Raetzke PB. Covering localized areas of root exposure employing the ‘‘envelope’’ technique. J Periodontol 1985;56:397-402.
5. Vergara JA, Caffesse RG. Localized gingival recessions treated with the original envelope technique: A report of 50 consecutive patients. J Periodontol 2004; 75:1397-1403.
6. Allen AL. Use of the supraperiosteal envelope in soft tissue grafting for root coverage. I. Rationale and technique. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1994;14: 216-227.
7. Zabalegui I, Sicilia A, Cambra J, Gil J, Sanz M. Treatment of multiple adjacent gingival recessions with the tunnel subepithelial connective tissue graft: A clinical report. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1999;19:199-206.
8. Tarnow DP. Semilunar coronally repositioned flap. J Clin Periodontol 1986;13:182-185.
Cortellini P, Tonetti M, Baldi C, et al. Does placement of a connective tissue graft improve the outcomes of coronally advanced flap for coverage of single gingival recessions in upper anterior teeth? A multi-centre, randomized, double-blind, clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol 2009;36:68-79.
Mörmann W, Ciancio SG. Blood supply of human gingiva following periodontal surgery. A fluorescein angiographic study. J Periodontol 1977;48:681-692.
Abstract
This study demonstrates changes in the gingival vascular supply of humans following various periodontal surgical procedures. A special system was used to photograph circulatory changes following an i.v. injection of sodium fluorescein to visualize blood supply. The results of this study suggest that the following concepts are important in the design of periodontal flaps. 1. Flaps should be broad enough at their base to include major gingival vessels. 2. A flap's length to width ratio should not exceed 2:1. 3. Minimal tension should be produced by suturing techniques and the tissue should be managed gently during the surgical procedure. 4. Partial thickness flap preparations to cover avascular areas should not be too thin so that more blood vessels are included in them. 5. The apical portion of periodontal flaps should be full thickness when possible.
Novaes et al. reported that..
Ayub LG, Ramos UD, Reino DM, Grisi MF, Taba M Jr, Souza SL, Palioto DB, Novaes AB Jr. A Modified Surgical Technique for Root Coverage With an Allograft: A 12-Month Randomized Clinical Trial. J Periodontol 2014;
cc: didn't like the appearance of her “longish” teeth and concerned about further attachment loss (recession)
multiple class III and IV recession defects
goal: improve biotype and modest root coverage gain
1 month post-op
4.5 year post-op
6.5 years post-op
pre-op and 6.5 year post-op
class III recession esp mand (therefore expected incomplete root coverage)
goal: improve biotype and modest root coverage gain
she and her GP noticed continued recession over the years and she disliked the appearance or her worsening root exposure
3 month post-op
pre-op
3 month post-op
models for a living..concerned about her smiles appearance and continued root exposure
class II and III recession
goal: improve biotype and modest root coverage gain
concerned about her continued root exposure
class II recession
goal: improve biotype and complete root coverage gain
8 months
8 months
3 years post-op
c/o generalized root hypersensitivity - esp mand teeth
class 1 recession
goal CRC
root surface visible in her smile
concerned about progressive recession and poor smile esthetics - getting married and wants to have nice smile for photos
class I and II recession
goal: CRC