Question · asked by 1 review
GTR rm associated with bone substitutes + CAF vs GTR rm + CAF: Occurrence of adverse effects or postoperative complications
- Population
- Adult patients with single (localised) recession-type defects (Miller Class I/II, at least 3 mm)
- Intervention
- GTR rm associated with bone substitutes + CAF
- Comparison
- GTR rm + CAF
- Outcome
- Occurrence of adverse effects or postoperative complications
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
GTR rm associated with bone substitutes + CAF vs GTR rm + CAF Occurrence of adverse effects or postoperative complications · Adult patients with single (localised) recession-type defects (Miller Class I/II, at least 3 mm) · Short term (6 to 12 months) Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects (2018) · Cochrane All outcomes | Dodge 2000: membrane exposure reported between the first and second weeks of healing | 1 study | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes | 15 January 2018 | Not listed | Not assessed |
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.