Method: Forty patients presenting Miller Class I buccal gingival recessions, associated with non-carious cervical lesions were selected. The defects were randomly assigned to receive either CTG or CTG+CR. Bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), relative gingival recession (RGR), clinical attachment level (CAL), and cervical lesion height (CLH) coverage were measured at the baseline and 45 days, 2, 3, and 6 months after the treatment.
Result: Both groups showed statistically significant gains in clinical attachment level and soft tissue coverage. The differences between groups were not statistically significant in BOP, RGR and CAL, after 6 months. The percentages of CLH covered were 77.31±9.58% for CTG and 75.12±10.66% for CTG+R (P>0.05). The estimated root coverage was 86.50± 13.96% for CTG and 81.79±14.2% for CTG+RC (P>0.05). The PD showed a statistically significant difference after 6 months, 1.8±0.9mm for CTG and 3.3±1.12mm for CTG+CR (P<0.05)
Conclusion: Within the limits of the present study, it can be concluded that both procedures provide similar soft tissue coverage after 6 months and the presence of composite resin may not prevent the root coverage achieved by connective tissue graft. However, the CTG+CR may lead to a higher probing depth after the healing period.