ArticleJournal of dental sciences2022
Treatment of multiple gingival recessions with concentrated growth factor membrane and coronally advanced tunnel technique via digital measurements: A randomized controlled clinical trial.
Article in Journal of dental sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 5 of them syntheses 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effect of Autologous Concentrated Growth Factor in Regenerative Dentistry: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JDR clinical and translational research · 2026Pooled it
- Efficacy of concentrated growth factor combined with coronally advanced flap in the treatment of gingival recession: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC oral health · 2025Pooled it
- Autologous platelet concentrates in root coverage procedures.Periodontology 2000 · 2025Pooled it
- Adjunctive therapy for root coverage with concentrated growth factor versus platelet-rich fibrin membranes: a systematic review and bayesian network meta-analysis.Clinical oral investigations · 2024Pooled it
- Efficacy of concentrated growth factor (CGF) in the surgical treatment of oral diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC oral health · 2023Pooled it
- Modified Coronally Advanced Tunnel Technique With Porcine Dermal Matrix for Recession Treatment: 12-Month Follow-Up.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2025Article
- Clinical outcomes of a peri-implant keratinized mucosa augmentation procedure using concentrated growth factor: a prospective case series.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Digitally measured exposed root surface area for predicting the effectiveness of modified coronally advanced tunnel combined de-epithelialized gingival grafting in the treatment of multiple adjacent gingival recessions.Clinical oral investigations · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/purpose: Research into biomaterial alternatives to connective tissue grafts (CTG) is a research hotspot. The purpose of this clinical trial was to compare the effectiveness of root coverage through tunnel technique with concentrated growth factor (CGF) vs CTG in treating multiple gingival recessions using digital measurements. Materials and methods: Seventy Cairo Class I multiple gingival recessions (in 28 patients) were treated with either CGF or CTG combined with coronally advanced tunnel technique. Digital models were obtained at baseline, 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 6 months post-op to compare the gain in gingival height, area, volume, and thickness. Tooth sensitivity, post-operative pain, and healing index were also recorded. Results: Complete root coverage at 6 months post-op were 47.06% in the CGF group and 77.78% in the CTG groups. Mean root coverages were 80.55% and 96.18%, respectively. No statistical difference was demonstrated between the two groups in terms of gingival area gain at 2 weeks post-op, but the CTG group had greater increases in gingival height, area, volume, and thickness in the period after 2 weeks post-op. Pain scores were statistically significantly lower in the CGF group. At 6 months post-op, sensitivity scores decreased more significantly in the CTG group. Conclusion: Digital measurements revealed post-operative gingival shrinkage was more pronounced in the CGF group than in the CTG group when combined with coronally advanced tunnel technique. Despite the ease-of-use and minimal post-operative discomfort, it is difficult to achieve similar root coverage outcomes to CTG when using CGF alone in treating multiple gingival recessions.
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.