Table 1 Summary of published data with histologic findings of different root coverage procedures
From: Bone-added periodontal plastic surgery: a new approach in esthetic dentistry
Author/year | Materials/methods | Results (histologic) |
|---|---|---|
Pasquinelli/1995 [22] | FGG+ tetracycline conditioning | 4.4 mm of new attachment and 4.0 mm of new bone growth. |
Harris/1999 [9] | CTG+ Partial DPF | Two different healing patterns: first onewas a long junctional epithelial attachment with minimal connective tissue |
The other pattern was a short junctional epithelium and predominately connective tissue. | ||
No new bone or cementum was seen in any section. | ||
Goldstein et al/2001 [6] | Periosteal CTG | Sulcular epithelium was keratinized; epithelium lining the dentin exhibited rete ridges projecting into the gingival connective tissue; and junctional epithelium extended over new cementum. New connective tissue attachment was also observed, including periodontal ligament. |
Majzoub et al/2001 [21] | CTG | Long junctional epithelium throughout the major portion. Only minimal signs of new cementum-like tissue |
Carnio et al/2002 [23] | CTG + EMD | Short junctional epithelium, dense CT fibers were found in close proximity to the root surface, |
No insertion of fibers into the root was observed. | ||
Newcementum and new bone in the most apical end of the grafted area. | ||
McGuire et al/2003 [10] | CTG | A connective tissue attachment |
No histological evidence of cementum, bone, or PDL. | ||
Cummings et al/2005 [24] | CTG | Cementum deposition within the root notches, unaffected alveolar bone. |
McGuire et al/2009 [18] | CTG + rhPDGF + beta-TCP | Evidence of regeneration of cementum, PDL with inserting connective tissue fibers, and supporting alveolar bone, none of the CTG-treated sites exhibited any signs of periodontal regeneration. |
Roman et al/2010 [25] | CTG | No ligament or bone, no sign of a long junctional epithelium a long connective tissue attachment |