An interventional study of mTA + SCTG in Gingival Recession, sponsored by Al-Azhar University. Status unknown. Open to participants aged 29 Years to 47 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2015-12-30.
Sponsored by Al-Azhar University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
Objectives: To clinically evaluate the healing of Miller Class I and II isolated gingival recessions treated with the modified tunnel approach (mTA) versus the conventional tunnel technique (cTT) in conjunction with subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG).
Material and Methods: In this split-mouth study, thirty healthy patients exhibiting two isolating anterior Miller Class I and II gingival recessions were treated with mTA + SCTG and cTT + SCTG. Treatment outcomes were assessed at baseline, 3-months and 6-months postoperatively. The primary outcome was root coverage esthetic scores (RES).
Various techniques have been suggested for the treatment of isolated mandibular recessions e.g., envelope, coronally advanced flaps double pedicle flap or tunneling procedures combined with laterally positioned pedicle flaps in conjunction with SCTG. Despite the fact that the mentioned techniques appear to improve root coverage, the success in terms of complete root coverage has high variability and thus it is still unknown which approach may lead to the most predictable outcomes. The limited evidence from the literature points clearly to the clinical importance of developing new concepts for predictable of isolated mandibular recessions.
The MTA is a dual flap approach; that starts with full thickness flap (avoiding papilla incision) till the level of the mucogingival junction. On reaching the level of the vestibular mucosa, a partial thickness flap is applied to undermine the base of the flap. Using this dual approach carries two main advantages: avoidance of severing the gingival blood supply through the full thickness flap, in addition to minimizing the tension on the flap tissue through using the partial thickness flap at the above-mentioned site.
In this trial, the mTA has been proposed for the surgical treatment of isolated mandibular recessions due to the following advantages: 1) it avoids vertical releasing incisions. 2) it doesn't incise the papilla, which may improve the vascularization of the area plus stabilizing the soft tissue flap. 3) it is suitable to patients with thin gingival biotype.
413 studies on the registry are indexed under Gingival Recession; 98 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 30 is close to the median of 30 across 379 interventional studies indexed under Gingival Recession.
Browse Gingival Recession studies →Al-Azhar University is the lead sponsor of 525 studies on the registry; 171 are open to participants now.
Of its 5 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 0 (0%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
This group included 30 recession defects treated with mTA + SCTG
Procedure: mTA + SCTG
This group included 30 recession defects treated with cTT + SCTG
These recession defects will be covered by modified tunnel approach; using a full thickness flap till the level of mucogingival junction then, partial thickness flap will be applied in the vestibular mucosa. SCTG will be harvested from the palate, put on the root surface then covered by the mTA and sutured.
Also known as: Dual approach + SCTG
The change in Root Coverage Esthetic Score
This score evaluates five variables: level of the gingival margin, marginal tissue contour, soft tissue texture, mucogingival junction alignment, and gingival color. It is calculated by expert operator.
Time frame: Baseline, 3 months and 6 months
The change in percentage of root coverage
The percentage of root coverage will be calculated at 3 months, then 6 months.
Time frame: Baseline, 3 months and 6 months
The change in depth of gingival recession
The change in depth of gingival recession will be calculated at baseline, 3 months and 6 months.
Time frame: Baseline, 3 months and 6 months.
No study locations are listed for this record.
This study is status unknown, as verified in Dec 2015. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.