Journal of Dental Medicine

Guided Tissue Regeneration (GTR) is the most recent and common method for regeneration of class II forcation molars. However, it requires membrane, which seems expensive for most of the patients. In order to overcome this problem, Coronally Position Flap (CPF) procedure may be applied which arresting the epithelial cell down growth, follow the same aim. This study is aimed to compare GTR technique utilizing bioresorable collagen membrane and CPF utilizing citric acid. Nine patients with grade II forcation defects were selected. Defects were bilateral that randomly assigned into two groups: GTR and CPF groups. Measurements recorded at baseline and after surgery (6 months). Paired-T test was performed on these data. The following results were obtained after 6 months: In both groups significant reduction in probing pocket depth were measured in GTR and CPF groups, 1.55 Ind 1.88 mm, respectively. Also, open vertical probing depth: 0.33, 1.11 mm. Reduction in forcation weight in both groups was 0.22 mm. Bone fill was observed in 0.33% and 51% of defects. No recession was observed in GTR group, in CPF was 0.11 mm. Loss of attached gingiva was 0.34 and 0.78 mm, respectively. No significant difference was found between clinical parameters except OHPD. Comparison of means at the day (0 and 180) in each group showed the success for regeneration of forca. Considering the results, it can be concluded that CPF may substitute for GTR technique.

Background and Aim: Increasing patient demands for esthetic, put the root coverage procedures in particular attention. Periodontal regeneration with GTR based root coverage methods is the most common treatment used. The purpose of this study was to compare guided tissue regeneration (GTR) with collagen membrane and a bone graft, with sub-epithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG), in treatment of gingival recession.

Materials and Methods: In this randomized clinical trial study, eleven healthy patients with no systemic diseases who had miller’s class I or II recession defects (gingival recession  2mm) were treated with SCTG or GTR using a collagen membrane and a bone graft. Clinical measurements were obtained at baseline and 6 months after surgery. These clinical measurements included recession depth (RD), recession width (RW), probing depth (PD), and clinical attachment level (CAL). Data were analyzed using independent t test with p<0.05 as the limit of significance.

Results: Both treatment methods resulted in a statistically significant reduction of recession depth (SCTG=2.3mm, GTR=2.1mm P<0.0001). CAL gain after 6 months was also improved in both groups (SCG= 2.5mm, GTR=2.1mm), compared to baseline (P<0.0001). No statistical differences were observed in RD, RW, CAL between test and control groups. Root coverage was similar in both methods (SCTG= 74.2%, GTR= 62.6%, P=0.87).

Conclusion: Based on the results of this study, the two techniques are clinically comparable. Therefore the use of collagen membrane and a bovine derived xenograft may alleviate the need for connective tissue graft.