What do systematic reviews say?

7 questions · 8 findings · 1 reviews · Other oral health

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 5 · 62.5%Very low 0 · 0%Low 3 · 37.5%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Closest answers

The findings closest to your search, judged one by one by TypeSafe's Jev model.

Direct match · question page
- EMP + CAF vs CAF · Keratinized tissue width change (short and medium term)
  Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Short and medium term (6 to 24 months)
  MD 0.40 [0.17, 0.62]
  3 studies
  GRADE not reported
Direct match · question page
- XCM + CAF vs CAF · Keratinized tissue width change
  Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Short term (6 to 12 months)
  MD 0.44 [0.04, 0.85]
  2 studies · 104 participants
  Low
Direct match · question page
- ADMG + CAF vs CAF · Keratinized tissue width change
  Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Short term (6 to 12 months)
  MD 0.28 [-0.08, 0.64]
  2 studies · 50 participants
  Low
Direct match · question page
- PRF + CAF vs SCTG + CAF · Keratinized tissue width change
  Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Short term (6 to 12 months)
  MD -0.26 [-0.98, 0.45]
  2 studies
  GRADE not reported
Direct match · question page
- GTR rm + CAF vs GTR nrm + CAF · Keratinized tissue width change
  Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Short term (6 to 12 months)
  MD 0.12 [-0.23, 0.48]
  2 studies
  GRADE not reported

GTR rm associated with bone substitutes + CAF vs GTR rm + CAF

Keratinized tissue width change · Adult patients with single (localised) recession-type defects (Miller Class I/II, at least 3 mm)

GTR rm associated with bone substitutes + CAF showed no clear difference in keratinized tissue width change compared with GTR rm + CAF; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
Short term (6 to 12 months)
MD 0.23 [-0.21, 0.68]
2 studies
GRADE not reported

EMP + CAF vs CAF

Keratinized tissue width change · Adult patients with single (localised) recession-type defects (Miller Class I/II, at least 3 mm)

EMP + CAF led to higher keratinized tissue width change (short and medium term) compared with CAF; GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
Short and medium term (6 to 24 months)
MD 0.40 [0.17, 0.62]
3 studies
GRADE not reported
Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
Short term (6 to 12 months)
MD 0.35 [0.13, 0.56]
3 studies · 136 participants
Low

GTR rm + CAF vs GTR nrm + CAF

Keratinized tissue width change · Adult patients with single (localised) recession-type defects (Miller Class I/II, at least 3 mm)

GTR rm + CAF showed no clear difference in keratinized tissue width change compared with GTR nrm + CAF; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
Short term (6 to 12 months)
MD 0.12 [-0.23, 0.48]
2 studies
GRADE not reported

PRF + CAF vs SCTG + CAF

Keratinized tissue width change · Adult patients with multiple recession-type defects (Miller Class I/II, at least 3 mm)

PRF + CAF showed no clear difference in keratinized tissue width change compared with SCTG + CAF; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
Short term (6 to 12 months)
MD -0.26 [-0.98, 0.45]
2 studies
GRADE not reported

ADMG + CAF vs CAF

Keratinized tissue width change · Adult patients with single (localised) recession-type defects (Miller Class I/II, at least 3 mm)

ADMG + CAF showed no clear difference in keratinized tissue width change compared with CAF (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
Short term (6 to 12 months)
MD 0.28 [-0.08, 0.64]
2 studies · 50 participants
Low

XCM + CAF vs CAF

Keratinized tissue width change · Adult patients with single (localised) recession-type defects (Miller Class I/II, at least 3 mm)

XCM + CAF may leads to higher keratinized tissue width change compared with CAF (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
Short term (6 to 12 months)
MD 0.44 [0.04, 0.85]
2 studies · 104 participants
Low

GTR rm associated with bone substitutes + CAF vs SCTG + CAF

Keratinized tissue width change · Adult patients with single (localised) recession-type defects (Miller Class I/II, at least 3 mm)

GTR rm associated with bone substitutes + CAF led to lower keratinized tissue width change compared with SCTG + CAF; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
Short term (6 to 12 months)
MD -2.38 [-2.84, -1.92]
2 studies
GRADE not reported