Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Successful management of gingival recession with interdental attachment loss using gingival unit grafts.
Katti, Neelima; Mohanty, Devapratim; Agrawal, Poonam; Raj, Subash Chandra; Pradhan, Shib Shankar; Baral, Debjani.
Afiliación
  • Katti N; Department of Periodontology, SCB Dental College and Hospital, Cuttack, Odisha India.
  • Mohanty D; Department of Periodontology, SCB Dental College and Hospital, Cuttack, Odisha India.
  • Agrawal P; Department of Periodontology, SCB Dental College and Hospital, Cuttack, Odisha India.
  • Raj SC; Department of Periodontology, SCB Dental College and Hospital, Cuttack, Odisha India.
  • Pradhan SS; Department of Periodontology, SCB Dental College and Hospital, Cuttack, Odisha India.
  • Baral D; Department of Periodontology, SCB Dental College and Hospital, Cuttack, Odisha India.
J Indian Soc Periodontol ; 26(4): 373-377, 2022.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35959310
Background: Gingival recession leads to root surface exposure devoid of periodontal attachment. Recession defects with interdental attachment loss (RT2, RT3), further increase the avascular area which is critical for survival of soft-tissue grafts. Nonsubmerged grafts such as free gingival grafts and gingival unit grafts (GUGs) rely primarily on plasmatic circulation from the recipient area during the initial stages of healing for its survival. Methods: Nineteen isolated RT2 recession defects, in the mandibular anterior region, were treated using GUG. The clinical parameters of recession depth (RD), recession width (RW), interdental clinical attachment levels (iCAL) were measured at baseline. Percentage of mean root coverage (MRC) was calculated at 3 months and 6 months. Results: The percentage of mean root coverage (MRC) achieved at the end of 6 months was 81.79% ± 6.16%. Further, Simple linear regression analysis to predict MRC at 6 months using baseline RW revealed, for every 1 mm decrease in RW, the percentage of root coverage significantly increased by 5.25% (P = 0.04). Conclusion: GUG can be used as an alternative treatment modality to achieve successful root coverage in RT2 recession defects. Baseline RW can be used to predict the outcome of root coverage at the end of 6 months.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Revista: J Indian Soc Periodontol Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article Pais de publicación: India

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Revista: J Indian Soc Periodontol Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article Pais de publicación: India