Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40423240›Full record

Trial reportJournal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.]2025

Predictability of Periodontal Surgical Guides Manufactured by Digital Flow in Clinical Crown Lengthening. A Randomized Trial.

Victor Gonçalves, Carolina Mendonça de Almeida Malzoni, José Cleveilton Dos Santos, Guilherme José Pimentel Lopes de Oliveira, Marcelo Gonçalves, Elcio Marcantonio

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.], 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Predictability of Periodontal Surgical Guides Manufactured by Digital Flow in Clinical Crown Lengthening. A Randomized Trial.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2025
    Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Victor GonçalvesDepartment of Diagnosis and Surgery, Universidade Estadual Paulista - Unesp, School of Dentistry, Araraquara, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-7896-4414
Carolina Mendonça de Almeida MalzoniDepartment of Diagnosis and Surgery, Universidade Estadual Paulista - Unesp, School of Dentistry, Araraquara, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-2868-4451
José Cleveilton Dos SantosDepartment of Diagnosis and Surgery, Universidade Estadual Paulista - Unesp, School of Dentistry, Araraquara, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-1811-8520
Guilherme José Pimentel Lopes de OliveiraDepartment of Periodontology, Universidade Federal de Uberlândia (UFU), School of Dentistry at Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-8778-0115
Marcelo GonçalvesDepartment of Diagnosis and Surgery, Universidade Estadual Paulista - Unesp, School of Dentistry, Araraquara, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-4548-7751
Elcio MarcantonioDepartment of Diagnosis and Surgery, Universidade Estadual Paulista - Unesp, School of Dentistry, Araraquara, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-1294-2305

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of periodontal surgical guides manufactured using a digital workflow in aesthetic clinical crown lengthening procedures.

methodsTwenty patients with altered passive eruption in the anterior maxilla requiring clinical crown lengthening were randomly divided into two groups: control group-free hand and test group-periodontal surgical guides. All patients underwent CBCT and intraoral digital scanning (IOS) examinations before the surgical procedure. Virtual planning was carried out in both groups, measuring the height of the gingival tissue to be removed. However, the surgical guides were only printed in the test group. IOS was performed on all patients 6 and 12 months after the surgical procedure to verify the predictability of the surgical technique in relation to the initial plan. Patients also answered a visual analog scale to measure postoperative pain.

resultsThe comparative analysis between the test and control groups showed no statistical difference in the amount of tissue planned to be removed, and the result obtained after 6 months and 1 year (Control group: median of -0.09 to 0.29 mm in 6 months and 0.00 to 0.55 mm in 12 months. Test group: median of -0.05 to 0.70 mm in 6 months and 0.00 to 0.81 mm in 12 months). No differences were noticed between the techniques tested concerning the positioning of the gingival margin in the 6- or 12-month periods in relation to the marginal tissues observed at the baseline period (p > 0.05). The level of pain presented by patients was low in both groups, with reports of minimal discomfort after the 15-day follow-up period. Patients demonstrated high satisfaction levels with the procedure regardless of the surgical technique.

conclusionBoth guided and conventional surgery techniques are effective for treating altered passive eruption. However, the painful sensation and tendency for recurrence of the coronal positioning of the marginal tissues were lower when the guided surgery technique was applied. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This study will help clinicians understand which surgical technique for treating altered passive eruptions is more appropriate for their clinical case.

Indexed as

Crown LengtheningSurgery, Computer-AssistedAdultCone-Beam Computed TomographyFemaleHumansMaleMaxillabiological spacegingivectomyosteotomyperiodontal surgical guide

Identifiers

PMID40423240
PMCPMC12315635

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.