Background
Few studies have looked at professional assessment or patient perception of aesthetics after root coverage procedures. The addition of connective tissue grafts (CTG) seems to improve aesthetic outcomes. The objective of this a priori analysis was to compare aesthetics after addition of CTG or a collagen matrix (CMX) to coronally advanced flap (CAF).
Methods
Two independent, trained and calibrated assessors analysed baseline and 6‐month post‐operative Images from 183 subjects with 475 recessions from a previously reported multicentre multinational randomized clinical trial. The root coverage aesthetic score (RES) was assessed in its five constituent components after assessing the suitability of images blindly with regard to treatment assignment and centre. Data were analysed at the tooth and subject level.
Results
One hundred and fifty‐five subjects (81 CTG) and 393 teeth (207 CTG) were included in the analysis. CTG control subjects had higher total RES scores (mean adjusted difference of 1.3 ± 0.8 RES units, p = 0.002). Analyses of RES subcomponents showed that the CTG group had higher scores in terms of gingival margin position but that better marginal tissue contour (OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.2–7.7) and soft tissue texture (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.9–5.8) was observed for the CMX group. No significant differences were observed for mucogingival alignment and gingival colour.
Conclusion
Better overall RES scores were observed for the CTG group. Better marginal tissue texture and marginal contour were observed in the CMX group. More research and development is needed to optimize materials to be used in conjunction with CAF to improve root coverage without negatively affecting tissue texture and marginal contour.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.