DOI 10.1186/s12903-025-05611-4
The effects of vestibular vertical incisions on the tunnel technique: a randomized clinical trial for the treatment of Recession Type 1 single gingival recessions.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND
To compare the clinical, esthetic, and patient-reported outcomes of the vestibular incision subperiosteal tunnel access (VISTA) technique and the modified tunnel (mTunnel) technique, both combined with connective tissue grafts (CTGs), for treating recession type 1 (RT1) single gingival recessions.
METHODS
A total of 24 patients with single non-molar RT1 recessions were randomly assigned to the VISTA + CTG or the mTunnel + CTG group. A blinded examiner assessed the recession reduction (RecRed), mean root coverage (MRC), complete root coverage (CRC), keratinized tissue width, patient-reported outcomes, and root coverage esthetic score (RES).
RESULTS
At 12 months, both groups achieved significant recession reduction. However, there were no significant differences in RecRed and MRC between the groups (VISTA: 2.38 ± 0.96 mm and 90.28 ± 18.06%, mTunnel: 2.08 ± 1.10 mm and 81.25 ± 29.16%; P = 1 and P = 0.834, respectively). The CRC was significantly higher in the VISTA group (VISTA: 75%, mTunnel: 50%; P < 0.001). Both groups obtained high RES scores (VISTA: 8.75 ± 1.14, mTunnel: 7.75 ± 2.99, P = 0.786), but the mTunnel group demonstrated significantly less scar formation (P = 0.014).
CONCLUSIONS
Both procedures effectively treated single RT1 recessions at 12-months follow-up. However, the VISTA technique demonstrated superior CRC results compared to the modified tunnel technique.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial had been registered prospectively at http://www.chictr.org.cn on 19/12/2015 (Registration number: ChiCTR-INR-16007845), and structured according to the CONSORT statement.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.