ClinicalTrials.gov
public full text
Public Domain
Root Coverage With Connective Tissue Graft Associated With VISTA Versus Tunnel Technique
Several techniques were proposed in the literature to solve the problems associated with gingival recession. Root coverage was mainly indicated for esthetic concern, however, it might also be indicated for treatment of root hypersensitivity and maintaining adequate plaque control by keratinized tissue augmentation. These proposed surgical techniques were well-documented with successful outcomes. Each technique had its own advantages, disadvantages and indications. Various factors affected the most suitable technique. These factors were either related to the dimensions of gingival recession defect, or related to the surgeon experience or to the patient himself . Nowadays, the scope of scientific research is concerned with designing surgical techniques that are more predictable, high esthetic, less invasive and patient centered In this way, continuous modification of surgical techniques aroused to result in a more reproducible outcomes; such as the attempt to advance pedicle flaps without vertical releasing incisions, as in the modified coronally advanced flap and the modified microsurgical tunnel technique. However, controversy still exist in the literature regarding the best technique for root coverage. Coronally advanced flap is the most commonly reported technique in research, with lack of researches on tunneling techniques.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Selective Versus Contiguous Connective Tissue Grafts in the Modified Tunnel Technique#856265
- Comparison of Root Coverage Outcomes by NORD Flap Versus Subepithelial Connective Tissue Graft in RT1 Gingival Recession#803440
- The Comparison of Different Root Coverage Techniques Using the Anatomical Recession Area Approach#1086723
- Evaluation of Subepithelial Connective Tissue Graft Versus Acellular Dermal Matrix With Tunnel Technique in Treatment of Multiple Gingival Recessions#1349616
- Changes in Soft Tissue Thickness Following Multiple Coronally Advanced Tunnel (MCAT) vs Vestibular Incision Subperiosteal Tunnel Access (VISTA)#912823
Record · ID 1419538
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive