Loading...
Publication
Recobrimento radicular cirúrgico: técnicas de tunelização Vs. retalhos de reposicionamento coronal
| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PPG_27861 | 266.27 KB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
Objetivo: analisar e comparar as técnicas de retalho de avanço coronal e de tunelização,
e posterior determinação de qual a técnica mais adequada e com maior preditibilidade
para o recobrimento de recessões gengivais, dependendo do tipo e da extensão dos
defeitos.
Métodos: foi elaborada uma revisão bibliográfica, com recurso a bases de dados
informáticas como a PubMed, Google Scholar e B-ON e foram apenas incluídos artigos
de revisão e ensaios clínicos randomizados a comparar os resultados de ambas as técnicas.
Resultados: foram obtidos e analisados apenas seis estudos randomizados controlados
comparando recobrimentos radiculares com os dois tipos de técnicas cirúrgicas. Todos os
parâmetros clínicos e estéticos neles avaliados foram descritos.
Conclusões: poucos são os estudos atualmente disponíveis que comparam de forma
efetiva as técnicas de tunelização e de retalho de reposicionamento coronal, bem como a
sua aplicação em classes I, II e III de Miller, tanto em recessões localizadas, como em
recessões gengivais múltiplas.
Objective: to analyze and compare the coronally advanced flap and the tunnel technique, and to assess which technique is the most appropriate and predictable for root coverage, depending on the type and extension of the defects. Methods: a review was performed using electronic databases such as, PubMed, Medline, Google Scholar and B-ON. Articles included were only reviews and randomized clinical trials comparing the results of both techniques. Results: only six randomized clinical trials comparing root coverage with both surgical techniques were obtained and analyzed. All clinical and aesthetic parameters evaluated were described. Conclusions: nowadays, there are few studies that compare directly these techniques as well as their application in localized or multiple Miller’s class I, II and III gingival recessions.
Objective: to analyze and compare the coronally advanced flap and the tunnel technique, and to assess which technique is the most appropriate and predictable for root coverage, depending on the type and extension of the defects. Methods: a review was performed using electronic databases such as, PubMed, Medline, Google Scholar and B-ON. Articles included were only reviews and randomized clinical trials comparing the results of both techniques. Results: only six randomized clinical trials comparing root coverage with both surgical techniques were obtained and analyzed. All clinical and aesthetic parameters evaluated were described. Conclusions: nowadays, there are few studies that compare directly these techniques as well as their application in localized or multiple Miller’s class I, II and III gingival recessions.
Description
Keywords
Coronally advanced flap Tunnel technique Root coverage Gingival recession