Evidence Hub

Can subepithelial connective tissue grafts be considered the gold standard procedure in the treatment of Miller Class I and II recession-type defects?

Chambrone L, Chambrone D, Pustiglioni FE, Chambrone LA, Lima LA

Journal of dentistry, 2008

10 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this systematic review was to answer the following question: 'Can subepithelial connective tissue grafts (SCTG) be considered the gold standard procedure in the treatment of recession-type defects?' DATA AND SOURCE: An electronic search (MEDLIINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL) for randomized controlled clinical trials with at least 6 months' follow-up comparing SCTG with other procedures for the treatment of gingival recession was performed up to December 2007.

STUDY SELECTION: To be eligible to this review patients had to present a diagnosis of gingival recession with the following characteristics: (a) recession areas selected for treatment classified as Miller [Miller Jr PD. A classification of marginal tissue recession. International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry 1985;5:8-13.] Class I or Class II of at least 2mm; (b) recession areas containing teeth with no caries or restorations; and (c) at least 10 participants per group at final examination. From a total of 568 references, 23 studies were considered relevant. The results indicated a statistically significant greater reduction in gingival recession for SCTG, when compared to acellular dermal matrix grafts and guided tissue regeneration with resorbable membranes (GTR rm). For clinical attachment level changes, differences between all groups were not significant. For changes in the keratinized tissue (KT), the results showed a statistically significant gain in the width of KT for SCTG…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 10 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free