Nanofilled and conventional resin-modified glass ionomer fillings combined with connective tissue grafts for treatment of gingival recessions with non-carious cervical lesions

• Published in: Journal of Oral Science Vol. 60; no. 3; pp. 344 - 351
• Main Authors: Dursun, Erhan, Güncü, Güliz N., Dursun, Ceyda K., Kiremitçi, Arlin, Karabulut, Erdem, Akalın, Ferda A.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Japan Nihon University School of Dentistry 2018
• Subjects: Adult; cervical filling; cervical lesion; Combined Modality Therapy; Connective Tissue - transplantation; connective tissue graft; Dental Restoration, Permanent - methods; Dentistry; Female; Gingival recession; Gingival Recession - therapy; Glass Ionomer Cements - chemistry; Humans; Male; nanofilled glass ionomer; Nanostructures - chemistry; Periodontal Index; Resin Cements - chemistry; resin-modified glass ionomer filling; root coverage; Tooth Wear - therapy; Treatment Outcome; root coverage; nanofilled glass ionomer; resin-modified glass ionomer filling; cervical lesion; Gingival recession; cervical filling; connective tissue graft
• ISSN: 1343-4934; 1880-4926
• DOI: 10.2334/josnusd.17-0190

The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical root coverage results of subepithelial connective tissue grafts (SCTG) performed on teeth with gingival recessions and non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) that were restored with cervical fillings and compare the results of two different filling materials: resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGIC) and nano-ionomer cements (NIC). A total of 54 teeth with Miller Class I gingival recessions with or without NCCLs in 36 patients (28 females, 8 males) were treated with SCTGs. Cervical lesions were randomly treated with RMGIC or NIC restorations. Periodontal clinical parameters, height of gingival recession (HGR), width of gingival recession (WGR), height of keratinized tissue, and dentin sensitivity were measured at baseline and 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. HGR and WGR values were statistically significantly reduced at all time points when compared to baseline values in all groups. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in any clinical periodontal parameter (P > 0.05). The percentage of root coverage at 12 months was 89.5%, 90.1%, and 96.2% in the RMGIC, NIC, and control groups, respectively. Successful root coverage with connective tissue grafts may be achieved on teeth restored with RMGIC or NIC cervical fillings.