ArticleJournal of periodontal & implant science2022
Treatment efficacy of gingival recession defects associated with non-carious cervical lesions: a systematic review.
Article in Journal of periodontal & implant science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of combined periodontal-restorative treatment versus periodontal treatment alone for gingival recession associated with non-carious cervical lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Pooled it
- Clinical Evaluation of Amniotic Membrane as an Adjunct to Modified Coronally Advanced Flap and Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Restoration in the Management of Gingival Recession Associated With Noncarious Cervical Lesions: A Randomized Split Mouth Trial.International journal of dentistry · 2026Article
- Comparison of clinical performance of glass ionomer cement vs. composite resin in restorations of non-carious cervical lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2025Review
- Article
- Current state about root coverage using soft-tissue substitutes in the presence of noncarious cervical lesions: A literature review.Journal of Indian Society of PeriodontologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis systematic review aimed to compare the efficacy, defined in terms of the mean percentage of root coverage (mRC), of surgical treatment approaches combined with adhesive restorations of non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) to that of root coverage alone in patients with a single gingival recession (GR) and NCCL.
methodsA literature search was conducted to identify longitudinal studies reporting the mRC following treatment for the correction of GR defects associated with NCCLs using a combination of surgical and restorative techniques in systemically and periodontally healthy patients.
resultsThe search resulted in the retrieval of 12,409 records. Seven publications met the inclusion criteria for the qualitative synthesis of data. The mRCs ranged from 69% to 97%. In the medium term, the gingival margin position was more stable when a connective tissue graft (CTG) was used, independently of whether restoration of teeth with NCCLs was performed.
conclusionsThe strength of the evidence was limited by methodological heterogeneity in terms of study design as well as the unit and period of analysis, which precluded a meta-analysis. Although no definitive conclusion could be drawn due to the lack of sufficient evidence to estimate the effectiveness of the interventions, CTG-based procedures contributed to gingival margin stability regardless of the performance of restoration to treat NCCLs.
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.