Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 13, 2025
A Novel Approach to Monitoring Graft Neovascularization in the Human Gingiva
Published on: January 12, 2019
The comparison of the efficacy of gingival unit graft with connective tissue graft in recession defect coverage: a
Sibel Kayaalti-Yüksek1, Emre Yaprak2
1Department of Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul Okan University, Istanbul, Turkey. sibelkayaalti@hotmail.com.
Objectives:
Gingival unit graft (GUG) is defined as the modified form of free gingival graft. The aim of this study is to compare the clinical efficacy of GUG with connective tissue graft (SCTG) with respect to clinical periodontal parameters and patient comfort scores in gingival recessions.
Materials And Methods:
Sixteen patients with bilateral recession type 1 (RT1) gingival recessions participated in this randomized and split-mouth study. Thirty-two defects received surgical treatment with SCTG or GUG. The recession defect coverage, periodontal measurements, and patient-reported outcomes (intra- and post-operative patient comfort, aesthetic satisfaction, and hypersensitivity) were evaluated at baseline and post-operative months 1, 3 and 6.
Results:
The favorable results were obtained in both study groups in gingival recession depth (RD), gingival recession width (RW), clinical attachment level (CAL), and keratinized tissue width (KTW). The average percentages of the recession defect coverage (RC) for GUG and SCTG group treatments after 6 months were 68.2 ± 33% and 76.4 ± 30.2%, respectively (p > 0.05). Although there was no significant difference between groups at post-operative 6 months (p > 0.05) in terms of RD, RW, CAL, RC, patient comfort, aesthetic satisfaction, and hypersensitivity parameters, the increase in KTW was significantly higher in GUG group (p < 0.05).
Conclusions:
It was concluded that although both techniques were effective, GUG can be a convenient method for treatment of RT1 gingival recessions with inadequate KTW and (or) shallow vestibule depth.
Clinical Relevance:
According to the results of this study, GUG may be a preferred choice in localized gingival recessions with a lack of keratinized tissue. The trial registration number: NCT04637451.
