Tunnel vs. CAF for the Treatment of Multiple Gingival Recessions

Many studies have compared the tunnel technique and coronally advanced flap in the treatment of single and multiple recessions. However, there is a lack of evidence that compared both techniques in combination with a connective tissue graft, for just multiple adjacent recessions. No technique is clearly superior to another in terms of complete root coverage (CRC), mean root coverage (MRC) and the gain of keratinized tissue height (KTH) when multiple recession coverage was evaluated. Moreover, as a connective tissue graft supposed to offer more stability in terms of complete root coverage in long-term basis, the main question should be aimed at the role of the sub-epithelial connective tissue graft, when it is used in combination with one technique or another. Hence, the hypothesis is focused on if the use of a connective tissue graft in combination with a tunnel technique would provide higher clinical outcomes and similar patient-based outcomes than its use in combination with the Coronally Advanced flap technique.