Influence of graft thickness on tunnel technique procedures for root coverage: a pilot split-mouth randomized controlled trial
- Victor Aguirre Teodoro de Carvalho,
- Marco Antonio Marques Mattedi,
- ,
- Francisco Wilker Mustafa Gomes Muniz,
- Jonathan Meza-Mauricio(corresponding author),
- Marcelo Faveri
- São Leopoldo Mandic Dental Institute and Research Centre,
- Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas,
- Programa de Pós-Graduação em Epidemiologia da Universidade Federal de Pelotas (UFPel),
- ,
- Guarulhos University
Open access
Publication Information
Output type
Original language
EnglishPages from-to (Number of pages)
Pages 3469-3477 (9 pages)Journal (Volume, Issue Number)
Clinical Oral Investigations (Volume 27, Issue 7)Publication milestones
- Accepted/In press - 2023
- Published - 07/2023
Publication status
ISSN
1432-6981Publication IDs
- Scopus: 85150503041
Abstract
Objective: To compare the clinical outcomes of the tunnel technique (TUN) combined with either thin connective tissue graft (CTG) (TUN + thin CTG) (1 mm) or thick CTG (TUN + thick CTG) (2 mm) for the treatment of localized gingival recession (GR). Material and methods: Twelve patients, with 24 maxillary localized type RT1 GR were randomly assigned into two groups. Clinical, esthetic, and patient‐reported outcomes were evaluated at baseline and at 6-month follow-up. Results: The TUN + thin CTG group showed a higher mean GR reduction (1.53 ± 0.66) (primary outcome variable) than the TUN + thick CTG group (1.44 ± 0.89), but no statistically significant difference was detected at the 6-month follow-up (p = 0.77). No statistically significant differences were found between TUN + thin CTG and TUN + thick CTG concerning complete root coverage (CRC) (58.3% versus 41.7%, respectively), gingival ticknness (GT) or Root-coverage Esthetic Score (RES) at 6 months. Regarding patient‐reported outcomes, both groups reported having experienced similar pain at 7 days (p > 0.05). No statistically significant differences were found between the groups in the analysis of the aesthetic score. Conclusion: Both treatments showed a similar reduction in GR. In addition, similar CRC, GT, RES, pain and self-reported esthetics were achieved in both groups. Clinical relevance: Application of thin CTG provided a similar result than thick CTG for the treatment of RT1 localized GR.
