الفهرس 
Review of LiteratureOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 194 |  |  |
| | | from | 194 | | |
Abstract
SUMMARY
The present study was conducted to compare between the clinical effectiveness of leukocyte platelet rich fibrin (L-PRF) and de-epithelized connective tissue graft (DECTG) both with coronally advanced flap (CAF) in management of Miller class I and II (single) gingival recession using root coverage (length and width) and gingival thickness as primary outcomes and patient satisfaction and keratinized tissue width as secondary outcomes.
Twenty-four patients (54 % males and 46 % females) with mean age of 35.7 (8.1) with twenty-four recession sites in aesthetic zone, were recruited from the outpatient clinic of Oral Medicine, Periodontology, and Oral Diagnosis department, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams University and Future University Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine in Egypt. They were randomly assigned to one of the following treatments:
group I: coronally advanced flap (CAF) combined with de epithelized connective tissue graft (DECTG)
group II: coronally advanced flap (CAF) combined with leukocytes platelets fibrin (LPRF) membrane.
The clinical parameters included: plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), gingival recession depth (RD), gingival recession width (RW), probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), keratinized tissue level (KTW) and (GT) that was measured radiographically by using CBCT. The measurements were taken prior to surgeries at baseline and six months postoperatively, while root coverage aesthetic score (RES) was taken at the end of the study.
The results of the present study showed that there was no statistically significant difference in mean (RD, RW, CAL, PD and RCES) between the two groups at baseline. After 6 months both treatment modalities showed significant improvement in all the previous parameters with no significant difference.
As regards KTW and GT there was no statistically significant difference in between the two groups at the baseline, however DECTG showed statistically significant gain in both parameters after 6 months.
Statistical analysis showed significant differences between the studied groups regarding patient satisfaction questionnaire scores as the L-PRF group experienced statistically significant less pain when compared to DECTG during treatment, one day and 1st week after treatment, and patients in this group, unlike the other group were willing to repeat the treatment if needed. While, no statistically significant differences were observed between groups regarding cosmetic outcomes.