Treating Gingival Recessions Using Coronally Advanced Flap or Tunnel Techniques with Autografts or Polymeric Substitutes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
MetadataShow full item record
AuthorToledano Osorio, Manuel; Muñoz Soto, Esther; Toledano Pérez, Manuel; Vallecillo Rivas, Marta; Vallecillo, Cristina; Ramos García, Pablo; Osorio Ruiz, Raquel
Connective tissueCoronal advanced flapGingival recessionGuided periodontal tissue regenerationSurgical flapsSystematic reviewTunnel technique
Toledano-Osorio, M... [et al.]. Treating Gingival Recessions Using Coronally Advanced Flap or Tunnel Techniques with Autografts or Polymeric Substitutes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Polymers 2022, 14, 1453. [https://doi.org/10.3390/polym14071453]
SponsorshipMinistry of Economy and Competitiveness; European Regional Development Fund [MINECO/AEI/FEDER/UE] PID2020-114694RB-100; Ministry of Universities FPU20/00450
Gingival recessions are a prevalent oral mucosa alteration. To solve this pathology, palatal mucosa or polymeric soft tissue substitutes are used when performing coronal advanced flap (CAF) or tunnel (TUN) surgical techniques. To evaluate which is the most successful approach, a literature review and meta-analysis were conducted. For the electronic search the National Library of Medicine, the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register, EMBASE and WOS were used. Pooled data for the percentage of root coverage was collected and weighted means were calculated. Heterogeneity was determined using the Higgins (I2) statistic and a random-effects model was applied. Thirteen studies were included in the systematic review (12 randomized and 1 controlled clinical trials) in which both techniques (394 patients) were compared with a follow-up of 4 to 12 months. Galbraith and Baujat plots were used to control for the presence of potential outliers. After performing the meta-analysis (11 studies), the mean root coverage was similar when using the TUN or CAF techniques (p = 0.49). The only differences between the two were found for single recessions, where CAF offered a higher percentage of root coverage (mean difference = 4.98%; p = 0.006). There were no differences when applying an autograft or a polymeric substitute with either of the two tested surgical techniques (p = 0.445).