Trial reportClinical oral investigations2025
Impact of partial restoration margin level in combination with connective tissue graft on the treatment of single RT1 gingival recessions associated with non-carious cervical lesions: a 1-year randomized parallel-group trial.
Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess whether the apical margin position of partial restorations (PRs) influences outcomes of coronally advanced flap (CAF) plus connective tissue graft (CTG) in single RT1 gingival recessions with Class B+ non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs). MATERIALS AND
methodsForty patients were randomized to receive PRs completed at the estimated cementoenamel junction (CEJ-0) or 1 mm apical to it (CEJ-1), placed two weeks before CAF + CTG. Clinical parameters-including recession depth (RD), mean root coverage (mRC%), keratinized tissue height, and gingival thickness-and patient-reported outcomes (pain, discomfort, sensitivity, esthetics) were evaluated up to 12 months.
resultsThirty-five patients completed follow-up. RD reduction and mRC% were similar (CEJ-0: 1.91 ± 0.91 mm, 83.3%; CEJ-1: 1.93 ± 0.78 mm, 81.6%). Esthetic scores assessed using the Modified Root Coverage Esthetic Score (MRCES) were comparable (8.63 vs. 8.38). Both groups showed increased gingival thickness, while CEJ-1 yielded lower early postoperative sensitivity and discomfort. Baseline RD predicted RD reduction (β = 0.568; p = 0.02).
conclusionsPR margins at or 1 mm apical to the CEJ provided similar clinical and esthetic outcomes when combined with CAF + CTG. The CEJ-1 approach improved early patient comfort without compromising root coverage. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Positioning the restoration margin 1 mm apical to the CEJ may enhance early postoperative comfort while maintaining comparable clinical and esthetic outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41417230What 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.