SynthesisHua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology2023
Comparison of the efficacy and long-term stability of tunnel technique and coronally advanced flap in the treatment of gingival recession: a Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Hua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative Effectiveness of Tunneling vs. Coronally Advanced Flap Techniques for Root Coverage: A 6-12-Month Randomized Clinical Trial.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and long-term stability of tunnel technique (TUN) and coronally advanced flap (CAF) combined with connective tissue graft (CTG) in treating gingival recession.
methodsDatabases including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and CNKI were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trial (RCT) of CAF+CTG compared to TUN+CTG in the treatment of Miller class Ⅰ or Ⅱ gingival recession on September 1, 2022.
resultsThere were 8 RCTs with 305 patients (454 recession sites) participating. The results of the Meta-analysis revealed that, in terms of mean root coverage (MRC) of main indicators, no significant difference was found between the CAF group and the TUN group in both short- and long-term results, which were [MD: 1.45%, 95%CI (-2.93%, 5.82%),
conclusionsThis study discovered that both CAF+CTG and TUN+CTG can achieve good root coverage in treating gingival recession, with CAF outperforming TUN and both groups achie-ving good long-term stability. After the operation, the TUN group had a higher RES than the CAF group. Given the limitations of this study, more high-quality studies are needed in the future to demonstrate the efficacy of TUN in gingival retraction surgery.
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.