Skip to search boxSkip to navigationSkip to main content

De-epithelialized free gingival graft versus subepithelial connective tissue graft in the treatment of gingival recession: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Joyce Rebeca Ignacio Tejedo
    ,
  • Rebeca Alexandra Cruzado Jara
    ,
  • Lorena Zegarra Caceres
    ,
  • Andrea Vergarabuenaventura
    ,
  • Francisco Wilker Mustafa Gomes Muniz
    ,
  • Marcelo Faveri
  • Universidad Científica del Sur
    ,
  • Niigata University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences
    ,
  • Programa de Pós-Graduação em Epidemiologia da Universidade Federal de Pelotas (UFPel)
    ,
  • Guarulhos University
    ,
Research Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Open access

Publication Information

Output type

Research Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Original language

English

Article number

27184

Pages from-to (Number of pages)

Pages e690-e699

Journal (Volume, Issue Number)

Medicina Oral, Patologia Oral y Cirugia Bucal (Volume 30, Issue 5)

Publication milestones

  • Published - 09/2025

Publication status

Published - 09/2025

ISSN

1698-4447

Publication IDs

  • Scopus: 105014540039
  • PubMed: 40818139

Abstract

Background: The best technique to harvest gingival graft to treat gingival recessions (GR) remains a topic of ongoing debate. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effect of de-epithelialized free gingival graft (DFGG) compared to subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) in the treatment of GR Miller Class I and II or Cairo type I. Material and Methods: Five databases were searched up to June 2024 to include randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing the clinical effects of DFGG with SCTG in the treatment of GR. The random effects model of mean differences was used to determine GR, and gain in keratinized tissue width (KTW), gingival thickness (GT) and clinical attachment level (CAL). The risk ratio was used to complete root coverage (CRC) at 6 and 12 months. Results: Five RCTs including 183 and 111 GR at 6 and 12 months were included in this systematic review. The meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference in GR reduction, gain in KTW, GT, CRC or CAL between groups at 6 and 12 months. Conclusions: At 12 months, the clinical results of DFGG were similar to those of SCTG in the treatment of GR.