| 2303 Comparative Histologic Analysis of Collagen Membrane versus Coronally Advanced Flap for Root Coverage | ||
|
E.-J. LEE1, S.J. MERAW2, T.-J. OH2, W.V. GIANNOBILE2, and H.-L. WANG2, 1South Korea, 2University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA Objectives: Guided tissue regeneration (GTR)-based root coverage has been utilized to correct gingival recession defects with promising results. So far, limited histologic information is available. Therefore, the aims of this study were: 1) to clinically and histologically evaluate the efficacy of GTR-based root coverage using collagen membrane (GTRC) and 2) to compare healing response between GTRC and the coronally advanced flap (CAF). Methods: Standardized gingival recession defects (5 mm) were surgically created on the labial surfaces of the maxillary cuspids of 8 mongrel dogs. Plaque was allowed to accumulate for 8 weeks to develop a chronic recession defect. Full mouth scaling and root planing was then performed coincident with 4 weeks of oral hygiene. Defects were randomly assigned to receive either GTRC or CAF treatment. Four dogs each were sacrificed at 4 and 16 weeks post-treatment. Clinical measurements included percent root coverage, the amount of keratinized gingiva (KG), and probing depth (PD). Sulcular depth, junctional epithelium and connective tissue attachment, new cementum formation, and new bone formation were evaluated histomorphometrically. Results: Clinically, both treatments (CAF and GTRC) achieved statistically significant (p < 0.05) root coverage when compared to baseline. The % root coverage was 92% and 72% (4 weeks) and 56% and 66% (16 weeks) for CAF and GTRC, respectively. KG was significantly increased in CAF-treated sites at 16 weeks, while no significant differences were found for other clinical parameters between treatments. Histometrically, GTRC showed a statistically significant increase of new attachment and newly formed connective tissue when compared to CAF at 16 weeks. In addition, sites treated with GTRC revealed trends of increased new bone and new cementum formation when compared to CAF. Conclusions: Results from this study suggest that both GTRC and CAF can be successfully used for the treatment of gingival recession defects. GTRC resulted in a greater amount of attachment than CAF. | ||
| Seq #209 - Re-evaluation of Traditional Periodontal Therapy 11:00 AM-12:15 PM, Friday, 8 March 2002 San Diego Convention Center Exhibit Hall C | ||
|
Back to the Periodontal Research - Therapy Program
| ||