HEALING RESPONSE OF GINGIVAL RECESSION DEFECTS FOLLOWING GUIDED TISSUE REGENERATION PROCEDURES IN SMOKERS AND NONSMOKERS

Citation
L. Trombelli et A. Scabbia, HEALING RESPONSE OF GINGIVAL RECESSION DEFECTS FOLLOWING GUIDED TISSUE REGENERATION PROCEDURES IN SMOKERS AND NONSMOKERS, Journal of clinical periodontology, 24(8), 1997, pp. 529-533
Citations number
26
Categorie Soggetti
Dentistry,Oral Surgery & Medicine
ISSN journal
03036979
Volume
24
Issue
8
Year of publication
1997
Pages
529 - 533
Database
ISI
SICI code
0303-6979(1997)24:8<529:HROGRD>2.0.ZU;2-S
Abstract
This retrospective study evaluated healing response in gingival recess ion defects following guided tissue regeneration (GTR) in smokers. 22 systemically healthy patients who had been treated for deep (greater t han or equal to 4 mm), buccal, Miller's class I or II gingival recessi on defects with ePTFE membranes were included. Patients were regarded as smokers if they smoked more than 10 cigarettes/day at the time of s urgical procedure. Occasional and former smokers were excluded. 9 pati ents (6 male, mean age 29 years) were smokers, while 13 patients (4 ma le, mean age 35 years) were non-smokers. Clinical parameters, recorded presurgery and at 6 months postsurgery, included defect-specific plaq ue (DPI) and bleeding on probing (BoP) scores, recession depth (RD), p robing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (GAL), and keratinized ti ssue width (KG). Extent of membrane exposure (ME) and newly formed tis sue (NFT) gain were assessed at membrane removal. Statistical analysis revealed no significant differences between smokers and non-smokers i n demographic and presurgery defect characteristics. DP1 and BoP score s were similar presurgery and remained almost unchanged throughout the observation interval in both groups. ME was significantly greater in smokers (2.6 +/- 1.4 mm) than in non-smokers (1.3 +/- 0.6 mm). NFT gai n was 2.8 +/- 1.0 mm in smokers and 3.6 +/- 1.4 mm in non-smokers, the difference being not statistically significant. Smokers showed signif icantly less RD reduction and root coverage (2.5 +/- 1.2 mm and 57%, r espectively) compared to non-smokers (3.6 +/- 1.1 mm and 78%, respecti vely). In conclusion, the results indicate that treatment outcome foll owing GTR in gingival recession defects is impaired in cigarette smoke rs.