Amnion–Chorion Membrane Versus Connective Tissue Graft with Coronally Advanced Flap for Treatment of Gingival Recession Defects: A Short-Term Comparative Clinical Study
Year: 2026
Type: article
Study design: Clinical Trial
Abstract: Introduction: Gingival recession is a common mucogingival condition managed by periodontal plastic surgery, with the coronally advanced flap (CAF) combined with a subepithelial connective tissue graft (CTG) regarded as the gold standard for root coverage. However, CTG requires a second surgical site and is associated with donor-site morbidity. Amnion–chorion membranes, derived from placental tissue, have been proposed as regenerative, donor-site-free alternatives. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the clinical efficacy of an amnion–chorion membrane and a subepithelial connective tissue graft, both used with CAF, in the treatment of Miller’s Class I and II gingival recession defects. Objectives: Clinically evaluate the efficacy of amnion-chorion membrane in combination with coronally advanced flap in the treatment of gingival recessions and to compare the efficacy of amnion chorion membrane and subepithelial connective tissue graft in the treatment of gingival recessions. Methods: Fourteen recession sites in patients aged 18–60 years were allocated to two groups (n = 7 each): Group A received CAF with an amnion–chorion membrane allograft, and Group B (control) received CAF with a subepithelial connective tissue graft. Plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), gingival recession depth (GRD), gingival recession width (GRW), relative attachment level (RAL), percentage root coverage, and width of keratinized tissue (KTW) were recorded at baseline and 3 months. Data were analysed using the independent-samples t-test or Mann-Whitney U test for between-group comparisons, the paired t-test or Wilcoxon signed-rank test for within-group comparisons, and the chi-square/Fisher’s exact test for categorical outcomes; p < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: The two groups were comparable at baseline for all parameters. Both groups showed statistically significant within-group improvement from baseline to 3 months in PI, GRD, GRW, and KTW (p = 0.0156 for each). Mean root coverage at 3 months was identical between groups (90.49 ± 16.25%), with complete root coverage achieved in 71.4% of sites in each group (p = 1.000). Reductions in GRD (2.00 ± 0.00 mm vs 2.29 ± 0.49 mm) and GRW (3.86 ± 0.38 mm vs 3.57 ± 0.53 mm) were statistically comparable between Group A and Group B (p > 0.05). RAL remained unchanged from baseline to 3 months in every patient in both groups. The gain in width of keratinized tissue was significantly greater in Group A (3.00 ± 0.58 mm) than in Group B (2.00 ± 0.82 mm; p = 0.032). Conclusions: Within the limits of this short-term pilot study, the amnion–chorion membrane achieved root-coverage outcomes statistically comparable to the subepithelial connective tissue graft, while producing a significantly greater gain in keratinized tissue width and eliminating the need for a donor site. The amnion–chorion membrane may therefore represent a clinically viable, patient-friendly alternative to connective tissue grafting for root coverage, warranting confirmation in larger, adequately powered trials with longer follow-up.
Source: Journal of chemical health risks
Author: Sruthy Sudir
Language: English
Subfield: Urology
Field: Medicine
Domain: Health Sciences
Open Access status: diamond
OpenAlex ID: W7221845902
FWCI:
Cites:
Cited by:
Related to: