Document Type : Systematic Review
Authors
1 Post Graduate, Dept. of Periodontics, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, India.
2 Dept. of Periodontics, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, India.
Abstract
Background: Gingival recession, the exposure of tooth roots due to gingival tissue displacement, poses aesthetic and periodontal challenges. This systematic review explores the effectiveness of the modified tunneling techniques in managing multiple gingival recession defects, aiming to inform clinicians about their advantages and limitations for evidence-based decision-making.
Materials and Method: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using electronic databases (e.g., PubMed, Embase) and relevant journals. Studies published up to 2024 were included. Eligible studies were selected based on predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed independently by two reviewers.
Results: The search yielded 617 articles, of which 4 met the inclusion criteria. Modified tunneling techniques included modified vestibular incision subperiosteal tunnel access (m-VISTA), modified coronally advanced tunnel (MCAT), and tunnel coronally advanced flap (TCAF). The study revealed favorable outcomes with modified tunneling techniques for multiple gingival recession defects. Notably, recession depth (RD) was reduced by 1.8mm (p Value= 0.01), while clinical attachment level (CAL) showed a gain of 1.84mm (p= 0.003). KT (keratinized tissue) and mRC (percentage reduction in recession) exhibited significant increases (p< 0.0001), suggesting the technique's efficacy. These quantitative improvements underscore the potential of the modified tunneling approach in effectively managing multiple gingival recession defects.
Conclusion: In summary, the systematic review assessing modified tunneling techniques for multiple gingival recession defects reveals promising outcomes. With an average mean root coverage of 86.5%, these techniques demonstrate notable efficacy. However, the review highlights the importance of considering the inherent risk of bias in the studies, emphasizing the need for standardized reporting and robust methodologies in future research to ascertain the true efficacy and long-term stability of these techniques.
Keywords
)