English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The aim of this study was to analyze the transplant efficiency of non-pedicled buccal fat pad graft (BFPG) for the treatment of Miller Class I or II gingival recessions (GRs) and to compare these results with those of subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG), which is considered the gold standard. Twelve patients with Miller Class I or II (≥2 mm) bilateral recessions in maxillary premolars or canines were selected. Recessions were randomly assigned to receive SCTG or BFPG. The clinical parameters evaluated at baseline and at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively included gingival index, plaque index, probing depth, GR, clinical attachment level, width of keratinized tissue, thickness of keratinized tissue and gingival margin to the acrylic guide. None of the evaluated clinical parameters differed significantly between the groups. At all evaluated postoperative time-points, both groups exhibited statistically significant differences in GR and gingival margin to the acrylic guide compared to baseline. Six months after surgery, the mean percentages of root coverage were 67.5% and 87.5% in the BFPG and SCTG groups respectively. In both groups, complete root coverage was observed in 50% of cases 6 months after surgery. The results presented herein indicate that the use of BFPG transplant has clinical similarities with SCTG and both may be considered as clinically successful methods for treating Miller Class I and II GRs.

Non-Pedicled Buccal Fat Pad Grafts to Treatment for Class I and II Gingival Recessions: A Clinical Trial