Comparison of two techniques in gingival recession treatment. A randomized one-year clinical follow-up study

Objectives: This one-year follow-up study aimed to compare envelope connective tissue graft (E-CTG) and semilunar coronally advanced flap (SCAF) techniques in recession treatment by using clinician- and patient-based parameters.
Methods: Patients were treated either with E-CTG (N=20) or SCAF (N=22). The recordings included recession depth, recession width, probing depth, clinical attachment level, keratinized tissue width, tissue thickness, clinical attachment gain (CAG), root coverage (RC), keratinized tissue change (KTC), wound healing index (WHI), dentine hypersensitivity (DH), tissue appearance, patient expectations and aesthetics that were taken at baseline, T₁ (sixth week), T₂ (sixth month) and T₃ (first year).
Results: E-CTG demonstrated better clinical outcomes in terms of RC (85.6% vs. 35.6%), CAG (50.7% vs. 33.3%) and KTC (1.70±1.49 mm vs. 0.36±0.96 mm) at T₃. Similar outcomes were detected in terms of WHI, tissue appearance, patient expectations and aesthetics. Although higher keloid formation and harder surgical experience were seen, better results were obtained after E-CTG in terms of DH and meeting the RC expectations.
Conclusions: Despite harder surgical experience and the risk of keloid formation, better clinician- and patient-based outcomes can be expected from E-CTG procedure in recession treatment.