JIOH on LinkedIn JIOH on Facebook
  • Users Online: 1150
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
CASE REPORT
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 8  |  Issue : 12  |  Page : 1123-1127

Mucograft® as an Alternative Treatment in the Management of Multiple Gingival Recessions: Case Report


1 Professor, Department of Periodontology, Positivo University, Curitiba, PR, Brazil
2 Student, Department of Periodontology, Positivo University, Curitiba, PR, Brazil
3 Professor, Department of Dentistry, University of Santo Tomas de Aquino, Bucaramanga, Santander, Colombia; PhD Student, Department Implant Dentistry, Federal University of Santa Catarina, SC, Florianópolis, Brazil

Correspondence Address:
Tatiana Miranda Deliberador
Professor, Department of Periodontology, Positivo University, Curitiba, PR, Brazil

Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.2047/jioh-08-12-15

Rights and Permissions

A variety of surgical procedures can be performed for the treatment of gingival recession, including the subepithelial connective tissue graft. Due to the morbidity reported by patients, alternative techniques using biomaterials has been frequently discussed. The objective of this study was to report the clinical follow-up of root coverage with coronally positioned flap associated with Mucograft® (collagen matrix) for 24 months. The fine gingival biotype tends to be delicate, possessing a small zone of keratinized mucosa. This type of thickness should be taken into special consideration since it directly influences in the aesthetics and the emergence profile. The gingival recession heights and the thickness of the tissue were measured initially and after 4, 9, and 24 months. 1 year post-operative, partial root coverage (22.5%) and gain in the thickness (100%) of the gingival tissue was observed. Although the root coverage with a coronally positioned flap associated with Mucograft® for this clinical case was not effective, a significant increase in thickness of the gingival tissue that received the collagen matrix was observed; thus, it was considered a viable treatment option and suitable for soft tissue augmentation. This clinical case, the Mucograft® was effective for the thickness of the gingival tissue; thus it is considered a viable treatment option and suitable for periodontal tissue augmentation.


[PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1690    
    Printed26    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded101    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal