A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Evaluating the Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Fibrin Matrix versus Subepithelial Connective Tissue Grafts in Dental Root Coverage: A Comparative Study Using Modified Ruben's Technique. | LitMetric

BACKGROUND Dental root coverage, crucial in managing gingival recessions, traditionally utilizes subepithelial connective tissue grafts. However, this approach has limitations such as donor site morbidity and graft availability. Recent studies have introduced platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) as an alternative, leveraging its regenerative potential and growth factors. Despite the promise, comparative assessments between PRF and conventional grafts remain limited. This research probes whether PRF, when used beneath a modified Ruben's mixed flap, could provide comparable or superior dental root coverage than a subepithelial connective tissue graft. MATERIAL AND METHODS We enrolled 30 patients exhibiting Miller's class I and II recession in this comparative case series. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either a connective tissue graft (15 patients) or a PRF matrix (15 patients), both covered by a modified Ruben's mixed flap. RESULTS Clinical parameters, including full mouth plaque scores, bleeding scores, probing sulcus depth, clinical attachment level, gingival position assessment, width, and thickness of attached gingiva, were assessed in both the control and test groups at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months post-surgery. Significant differences were observed at all intervals.At the 12-month mark, the control group (connective tissue graft) achieved 91% complete root coverage, while the test group (PRF matrix) achieved 86%. However, this difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS The study outcomes suggest comparable gains in root coverage and attached gingiva between the connective tissue graft and PRF matrix groups. Thus, the results support our hypothesis that a subepithelial PRF matrix can serve as a viable alternative to a subepithelial connective tissue graft for treating dental root coverage.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10559832PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.12659/MSM.941473DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

connective tissue
28
root coverage
24
tissue graft
20
subepithelial connective
16
dental root
16
prf matrix
16
modified ruben's
12
platelet-rich fibrin
8
tissue grafts
8
ruben's mixed
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!