ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The current clinical trial was conducted to evaluate the effect of proximal indirect restorations in endodontically treated posterior teeth with deeply located margins following deep margin elevation compared to surgical crown lengthening. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Deep proximal cavities in endodontically treated posterior teeth were randomly assigned into two groups; deep margin elevation (DME) or crown lengthening (CL). The clinical attachment level (CAL), probing depth (PD), bleeding on probing (BOP), crestal bone level (CBL), and secondary caries were evaluated at the baseline, 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. RESULTS: A total of 20 proximal cavities were included in the study; there was no significant difference between the two groups regarding mean CAL values at the baseline and 1 month, while there was a significant difference between the two groups in all other periods. Regarding the PD, there was no statistical significance between the two groups except at 9 and 12 months, where CL showed higher mean PD values than DME. There was no statistically significant difference in BOP or CBL between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: DME and CL are considered clinically successful with favorable biologic responses. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The deep margin elevation approach could provide a more conservative solution when relocating deeply seated cervical margins in a more coronal position. DME reduced the number of visits and time needed for the restoration of endodontically treated teeth. Surgical crown lengthening remains a gold standard procedure in the re-establishment of the supracrestal tissue attachment, especially in cases where cervical margins are beyond the elevation capacity.
