Post Title

Objective: The introduction of a new collagen substitute, that potentially will reduce the invasiveness of the two techniques, by avoiding the need for a second surgical site, i.e., the donor site, need to be evaluated in relation with the surgical procedure that could benefit the most by the utilization of such a matrix. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes following treatment of RT 1 multiple adjacent gingival recessions (MAGRs) using the modified coronally advanced tunnel technique (MCAT) or the multiple coronally advanced flap (MCAF) in conjunction with a new volume stable xenogeneic collagen matrix (VXCM). Secondarily, the study evaluated whether patients report a preference in terms of discomfort between the two surgical techniques.Methods: Twenty patients requiring treatment of MAGRs were randomly assigned to one of the two treatment groups (group A: MCAF+VCMX; group B: MCAT+VCMX). The following measurements were recorded at baseline (i.e. prior to surgery), at 6 and 12 months: gingival recession depth (REC), probing pocket depth (PPD), keratinized tissue width (KTW) and gingival thickness (GT). Post-operative pain and discomfort were recorded using a visual analogue scale (VAS) at 1 week. The primary outcome variable was mean root coverage (mRC), secondary outcomes were complete root coverage (CRC), change in KTW and GT, patient discomfort and satisfaction, and duration of surgery.Results: Healing was uneventful in both groups. At 12 months, both treatments resulted in statistically significant improvements of REC and GT compared with baseline (p < 0.05). The mRC measured 79.95 ± 29.92% at MCAF group, whereas 64.74 ± 40.5% MCAT group (p = 0.124). CRC was found at 65.6% of MCAF-treated sites and at 52% of MCAT-treated sites (p=0.181).Conclusions: Similar clinical results should be expected when MAGRs are treated with MCAF or MCAT, with the adjunct of VCMX.