Comparison of minimally invasive coronally advanced flap and modified coronally advanced flap for the management of multiple adjacent gingival recession defects

A split mouth randomized control trial

Valliammai Rajendran, Ashita Uppoor, David Kadakampally, Yamini Mannava

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Introduction: Various minimally invasive surgical approaches are proposed for the management of gingival recession. A modified surgical approach coined as minimally invasive coronally advanced flap (MICAF) was compared with modified coronally advanced flap (MCAF) for the management of multiple adjacent gingival recession defects. Materials and methods: Seven systemically healthy subjects with bilateral multiple adjacent maxillary facial gingival recession defects (Miller I) were included in this study. In each patient, MICAF performed on one side and on the other side MCAF was performed. Comparisons of the surgical sites were made with clinical measurements at 6 months follow-up. Results: No statistically significant differences were observed between MICAF and MCAF sites in the change in gingival recession depth, gingival recession width, clinical attachment level, width of the keratinized tissue, mean, and complete root coverage after 6 months. However, patient reported outcomes of esthetics and postoperative morbidity were statistically significant (P <0.001) between the MICAF and the MCAF sides with better results in the MICAF side. Conclusions: Within the confines of this study, the results depicted that MICAF is more patient-friendly procedure with better patient acceptance. Further, long-term studies with more sample sizes are needed for a stronger evidence base. Clinical Significance: Miller Class I gingival recessions can be treated with the MICAF with successful clinical outcomes and patient acceptance. This paper reports the clinical and patient reported outcomes of the MICAF and the MCAF.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)509-515
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry
Volume30
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01-11-2018

Fingerprint

Gingival Recession
Mouth
Esthetics
Sample Size
Healthy Volunteers
Morbidity

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

@article{d9289490ec0b49b79f1dfa1e628eb8c7,
title = "Comparison of minimally invasive coronally advanced flap and modified coronally advanced flap for the management of multiple adjacent gingival recession defects: A split mouth randomized control trial",
abstract = "Introduction: Various minimally invasive surgical approaches are proposed for the management of gingival recession. A modified surgical approach coined as minimally invasive coronally advanced flap (MICAF) was compared with modified coronally advanced flap (MCAF) for the management of multiple adjacent gingival recession defects. Materials and methods: Seven systemically healthy subjects with bilateral multiple adjacent maxillary facial gingival recession defects (Miller I) were included in this study. In each patient, MICAF performed on one side and on the other side MCAF was performed. Comparisons of the surgical sites were made with clinical measurements at 6 months follow-up. Results: No statistically significant differences were observed between MICAF and MCAF sites in the change in gingival recession depth, gingival recession width, clinical attachment level, width of the keratinized tissue, mean, and complete root coverage after 6 months. However, patient reported outcomes of esthetics and postoperative morbidity were statistically significant (P <0.001) between the MICAF and the MCAF sides with better results in the MICAF side. Conclusions: Within the confines of this study, the results depicted that MICAF is more patient-friendly procedure with better patient acceptance. Further, long-term studies with more sample sizes are needed for a stronger evidence base. Clinical Significance: Miller Class I gingival recessions can be treated with the MICAF with successful clinical outcomes and patient acceptance. This paper reports the clinical and patient reported outcomes of the MICAF and the MCAF.",
author = "Valliammai Rajendran and Ashita Uppoor and David Kadakampally and Yamini Mannava",
year = "2018",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/jerd.12418",
language = "English",
volume = "30",
pages = "509--515",
journal = "Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry",
issn = "1496-4155",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of minimally invasive coronally advanced flap and modified coronally advanced flap for the management of multiple adjacent gingival recession defects

T2 - A split mouth randomized control trial

AU - Rajendran, Valliammai

AU - Uppoor, Ashita

AU - Kadakampally, David

AU - Mannava, Yamini

PY - 2018/11/1

Y1 - 2018/11/1

N2 - Introduction: Various minimally invasive surgical approaches are proposed for the management of gingival recession. A modified surgical approach coined as minimally invasive coronally advanced flap (MICAF) was compared with modified coronally advanced flap (MCAF) for the management of multiple adjacent gingival recession defects. Materials and methods: Seven systemically healthy subjects with bilateral multiple adjacent maxillary facial gingival recession defects (Miller I) were included in this study. In each patient, MICAF performed on one side and on the other side MCAF was performed. Comparisons of the surgical sites were made with clinical measurements at 6 months follow-up. Results: No statistically significant differences were observed between MICAF and MCAF sites in the change in gingival recession depth, gingival recession width, clinical attachment level, width of the keratinized tissue, mean, and complete root coverage after 6 months. However, patient reported outcomes of esthetics and postoperative morbidity were statistically significant (P <0.001) between the MICAF and the MCAF sides with better results in the MICAF side. Conclusions: Within the confines of this study, the results depicted that MICAF is more patient-friendly procedure with better patient acceptance. Further, long-term studies with more sample sizes are needed for a stronger evidence base. Clinical Significance: Miller Class I gingival recessions can be treated with the MICAF with successful clinical outcomes and patient acceptance. This paper reports the clinical and patient reported outcomes of the MICAF and the MCAF.

AB - Introduction: Various minimally invasive surgical approaches are proposed for the management of gingival recession. A modified surgical approach coined as minimally invasive coronally advanced flap (MICAF) was compared with modified coronally advanced flap (MCAF) for the management of multiple adjacent gingival recession defects. Materials and methods: Seven systemically healthy subjects with bilateral multiple adjacent maxillary facial gingival recession defects (Miller I) were included in this study. In each patient, MICAF performed on one side and on the other side MCAF was performed. Comparisons of the surgical sites were made with clinical measurements at 6 months follow-up. Results: No statistically significant differences were observed between MICAF and MCAF sites in the change in gingival recession depth, gingival recession width, clinical attachment level, width of the keratinized tissue, mean, and complete root coverage after 6 months. However, patient reported outcomes of esthetics and postoperative morbidity were statistically significant (P <0.001) between the MICAF and the MCAF sides with better results in the MICAF side. Conclusions: Within the confines of this study, the results depicted that MICAF is more patient-friendly procedure with better patient acceptance. Further, long-term studies with more sample sizes are needed for a stronger evidence base. Clinical Significance: Miller Class I gingival recessions can be treated with the MICAF with successful clinical outcomes and patient acceptance. This paper reports the clinical and patient reported outcomes of the MICAF and the MCAF.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85055688159&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85055688159&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/jerd.12418

DO - 10.1111/jerd.12418

M3 - Article

VL - 30

SP - 509

EP - 515

JO - Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry

JF - Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry

SN - 1496-4155

IS - 6

ER -