METHODS:
10 years after the original surgery for gingival recession, 10 of 17 patients were returned for follow-up evaluation. Among the parameters measured at 10 years: Percent root coverage, gingival recession depth, probing depths , width of keratinized tissue and clinical attachment levels.
RESULTS:
No difference between Emdogain and Coronally Advanced Flap when compared to Connective Tissue and Coronally Advanced Flap for all measured parameters.
CONCLUSIONS:
Both procedures are equally clinically effective and stable at 10 years for the treatment of Miller class I and II recession defects.
DR. GABRAEL’S COMMENTS:
Important long term data. Gains in root coverage appear stable at 10 years for both treatment modalities.
FOR MORE INFORMATION REFER TO:
Evaluation of human recession defects treated with coronally advanced flaps and either enamel matrix derivative or connective tissue: Comparison of clinical parameters at 10 years.
Journal of Periodontology November 2012, Vol.83, No.11, Pages 1353- 1362
