ArticleJournal of dentistry (Shiraz, Iran)2020
Efficacy of Application of Plasma Rich in Growth Factors Along with the Tunnel Technique for Treatment of Gingival Recession: a Clinical Trial.
Article in Journal of dentistry (Shiraz, Iran), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
statement of the problemThe tunnel technique has shown promising results in treatment of gingival recession. Plasma rich in growth factors (PRGF) is considered effective for soft tissue regeneration since it is a rich source of growth factors. PURPOSE: This clinical trial aimed to assess the efficacy of PRGF along with the tunnel technique and connective tissue graft for treatment of gingival recession. MATERIALS AND
methodIn this controlled clinical trial, 20 areas around anterior and posterior teeth in 3 patients with gingival recession were bilaterally selected. The tunnel technique was used with and without PRGF in the test and control groups, respectively (10 areas in each group). The keratinized gingival width (KGW), clinical attachment level (CAL), clinical probing depth (PD), cementoenamel junction (CEJ) to mucogingival junction (MGJ) distance, and the esthetic visual analog scale (EVAS) score were evaluated preoperatively and at 6 weeks and 3 months, postoperatively. The gingival recession width (RW) and vertical recession depth (VRD) were assessed preoperatively and at 2 weeks and 3 months, postoperatively. The pain visual analog scale (PVAS) score was measured at 1, 3 and 7 days, post-treatment and the healing index (HI) was measured at 1, 3 and 7 days and 1 month, postoperatively. The root coverage percentage was assessed during 3 months. Paired t-test and repeated measures ANOVA were used for statistical analyses.
resultsSignificant improvements were noted in all tested parameters in both groups (
conclusionTreatment of gingival recession with the tunnel technique can yield favorable clinical outcome, irrespective of the employment of PRGF.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.