Comparison of coronally advanced versus semilunar coronally repositioned flap in the management of maxillary gingival recessions

Objectives: Maxillary gingival recessions can be managed by both semilunar coronally repositioned flap (SLCRF) and coronally advanced flap (CAF). The objective of this study was to compare SLRCF and CAF in terms of wound healing and periodontal parameters in the presence of magnification. Materials...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Bharath R. Govindasamy, Vanaja Krishna Naik, Aruna Balasundaram
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Elsevier 2021
Materias:	Gingival recession Microsurgery Surgical flaps Treatment outcome Wound healing Medicine R Dentistry RK1-715
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/586b87228c664b10972313588100059d
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:586b87228c664b10972313588100059d
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:586b87228c664b10972313588100059d2021-11-10T04:18:49ZComparison of coronally advanced versus semilunar coronally repositioned flap in the management of maxillary gingival recessions1013-905210.1016/j.sdentj.2020.05.005https://doaj.org/article/586b87228c664b10972313588100059d2021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1013905220302467https://doaj.org/toc/1013-9052Objectives: Maxillary gingival recessions can be managed by both semilunar coronally repositioned flap (SLCRF) and coronally advanced flap (CAF). The objective of this study was to compare SLRCF and CAF in terms of wound healing and periodontal parameters in the presence of magnification. Materials and methods: Thirty patients with Miller’s class I gingival recession in maxillary anteriors and premolars were assigned to 2 groups including SLCRF and CAF. All procedures were performed using 2.5× magnifying loupes. Wound healing and periodontal clinical parameters were assessed at baseline and at 2nd, 4th, 8th and 12th week. Results: No significant difference was observed in wound healing and mean percentage root coverage in both the groups at 12th week (p > 0.05). However, SLCRF showed a statistically significant reduction in percentage of root coverage (PRC) at 12th week compared to 2nd week (p < 0.05). A significant gain in Clinical attachment level, width of keratinised tissue and a significant reduction in Recession Depth and Probing Depth were seen in both the groups at 12th week. Conclusion: Within the limitation of this study, both techniques resulted in similar wound healing at 12th week with the use of magnification. CAF provided more root coverage compared to SLCRF technique in the maxillary class I gingival recession defects.Bharath R. GovindasamyVanaja Krishna NaikAruna BalasundaramElsevierarticleGingival recessionMicrosurgerySurgical flapsTreatment outcomeWound healingMedicineRDentistryRK1-715ENSaudi Dental Journal, Vol 33, Iss 7, Pp 642-649 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Gingival recession Microsurgery Surgical flaps Treatment outcome Wound healing Medicine R Dentistry RK1-715
spellingShingle	Gingival recession Microsurgery Surgical flaps Treatment outcome Wound healing Medicine R Dentistry RK1-715 Bharath R. Govindasamy Vanaja Krishna Naik Aruna Balasundaram Comparison of coronally advanced versus semilunar coronally repositioned flap in the management of maxillary gingival recessions
description	Objectives: Maxillary gingival recessions can be managed by both semilunar coronally repositioned flap (SLCRF) and coronally advanced flap (CAF). The objective of this study was to compare SLRCF and CAF in terms of wound healing and periodontal parameters in the presence of magnification. Materials and methods: Thirty patients with Miller’s class I gingival recession in maxillary anteriors and premolars were assigned to 2 groups including SLCRF and CAF. All procedures were performed using 2.5× magnifying loupes. Wound healing and periodontal clinical parameters were assessed at baseline and at 2nd, 4th, 8th and 12th week. Results: No significant difference was observed in wound healing and mean percentage root coverage in both the groups at 12th week (p > 0.05). However, SLCRF showed a statistically significant reduction in percentage of root coverage (PRC) at 12th week compared to 2nd week (p < 0.05). A significant gain in Clinical attachment level, width of keratinised tissue and a significant reduction in Recession Depth and Probing Depth were seen in both the groups at 12th week. Conclusion: Within the limitation of this study, both techniques resulted in similar wound healing at 12th week with the use of magnification. CAF provided more root coverage compared to SLCRF technique in the maxillary class I gingival recession defects.
format	article
author	Bharath R. Govindasamy Vanaja Krishna Naik Aruna Balasundaram
author_facet	Bharath R. Govindasamy Vanaja Krishna Naik Aruna Balasundaram
author_sort	Bharath R. Govindasamy
title	Comparison of coronally advanced versus semilunar coronally repositioned flap in the management of maxillary gingival recessions
title_short	Comparison of coronally advanced versus semilunar coronally repositioned flap in the management of maxillary gingival recessions
title_full	Comparison of coronally advanced versus semilunar coronally repositioned flap in the management of maxillary gingival recessions
title_fullStr	Comparison of coronally advanced versus semilunar coronally repositioned flap in the management of maxillary gingival recessions
title_full_unstemmed	Comparison of coronally advanced versus semilunar coronally repositioned flap in the management of maxillary gingival recessions
title_sort	comparison of coronally advanced versus semilunar coronally repositioned flap in the management of maxillary gingival recessions
publisher	Elsevier
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/586b87228c664b10972313588100059d
work_keys_str_mv	AT bharathrgovindasamy comparisonofcoronallyadvancedversussemilunarcoronallyrepositionedflapinthemanagementofmaxillarygingivalrecessions AT vanajakrishnanaik comparisonofcoronallyadvancedversussemilunarcoronallyrepositionedflapinthemanagementofmaxillarygingivalrecessions AT arunabalasundaram comparisonofcoronallyadvancedversussemilunarcoronallyrepositionedflapinthemanagementofmaxillarygingivalrecessions
_version_	1718440650681090048

Comparison of coronally advanced versus semilunar coronally repositioned flap in the management of maxillary gingival recessions

Ejemplares similares