Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession-type defects

Abstract

Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession-type defects.

Long‐term stability of root coverage procedures for single gingival recessions: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…The stability of various root coverage procedures has already been qualitatively discussed by some authors (Cairo, ; Chambrone & Tatakis, ; Chambrone et al., ; Cortellini & Pini Prato, ; Silva, de Lima, Sallum, & Tatakis, ; Zucchelli & De Sanctis, ; Zucchelli & Mounssif, ). To our limited knowledge, this review is the first one to systematically compare the short‐term with long‐term outcomes of a therapy for single gingival recessions as well as the long‐term results among different root coverage procedures.…”

Extracellular matrix‐based scaffolding technologies for periodontal and peri‐implant soft tissue regeneration

“…1) and soft tissue augmentation at tooth or implant sites (Fig. 17,20,21 Although ADM is considered to be the graft substitute with the most similar outcomes to the connective tissue graft (CTG), 22 a recent network metaanalysis evaluating the changes in root coverage outcomes over time showed that only CTG-treated sites had a trend towards the stability of the gingival margin among the other root coverage techniques. 17,20,21 Although ADM is considered to be the graft substitute with the most similar outcomes to the connective tissue graft (CTG), 22 a recent network metaanalysis evaluating the changes in root coverage outcomes over time showed that only CTG-treated sites had a trend towards the stability of the gingival margin among the other root coverage techniques.…”

Adjunctive benefit of a xenogenic collagen matrix associated with coronally advanced flap for the treatment of multiple gingival recessions: A superiority, assessor‐blind, randomized clinical trial

“…In patients with a sufficient amount (≥2 mm) of keratinized tissue, the coronally advanced flap (CAF) has been shown to be a very effective treatment of single and multiple recessions in terms of aesthetic results and patients' morbidity (Chambrone et al, ; Pini‐Prato et al, ). Although CAF is a safe and predictable approach for achieving root coverage, there is strong evidence supporting the combination of this technique with autologous connective tissue graft to achieve complete root coverage (CRC) in gingival recessions without interproximal attachment loss and non‐carious cervical lesions, with long‐term stability (Chambrone et al, ; Chambrone & Tatakis, ; Graziani et al, ; Pini Prato, Franceschi, Cortellini, & Chambrone, ; Pini Prato, Magnani, & Chambrone, ; Tonetti & Jepsen, ).…”

“…This procedure, however, has limited indications in aesthetic areas due to compromised results obtained by virtue of using epithelialized grafts (“patch‐like area”). The use of free connective tissue grafts (CTG) conversely provides higher predictability in achieving complete root coverage and improved colour matching (Chambrone et al, ; Chambrone & Tatakis, ; Pini Prato, Franceschi, et al, ; Pini Prato, Magnani, et al, ). Both surgical techniques are associated with variable but important patient morbidity due to the need of creating a palatal wound (donor site) and limited by the amount and quality of soft tissue available.…”