ABSTRACT
Objective@#This systematic review aimed to evaluate periodontal parameters in orthodontically tractioned teeth compared with the respective non-tractioned contralateral teeth. @*Methods@#Search strategies were developed for six electronic databases and gray literature. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed for the outcomes of interest. Furthermore, the certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) tool. @*Results@#Overall, 2,082 articles were identified, of which 24 were selected for the qualitative synthesis. A significant difference was observed between the impacted and contralateral teeth (mean difference [MD] = 0.25; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.10–0.40; I 2 = 0%) when the gingival index was evaluated. Additionally, impacted teeth showed a greater probing depth, with a significant mean difference between the groups (MD = 0.14; 95% CI = 0.07–0.20; I 2 = 6%). Most studies had a low risk of bias; however, the certainty of the evidence was very low owing to the design of existing studies. @*Conclusions@#The evidence in the literature indicated that tractioned teeth might show worsening of periodontal parameters related to the gingival index and probing depth; however, the evidence remains uncertain about this outcome. Furthermore, probing depth should be considered regarding its clinical significance because of the small effect size observed.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Subepithelial connective tissue grafts (SCTGs) are commonly performed for the treatment of gingival recession due to their high predictability. This study evaluated and histologically compared connective tissue grafts in terms of the presence of epithelial remnants and composition of the tissue types that were present (epithelium, lamina propria, and submucosa).METHODS: Ten patients underwent epithelium removal using 2 different techniques: the use of a blade (group B) and through abrasion (group A). Twenty samples were collected and each tissue type was analyzed histologically in terms of its area, thickness, and proportion of the total area of the graft.RESULTS: In 4 samples (40%) from group B (n=10) and 2 samples (20%) from group A (n=10), the presence of an epithelial remnant was observed, but the difference between the groups was not statistically significant (P>0.05). Likewise, no statistically significant differences were observed between the groups regarding the area, mean thickness, or proportion of the total area for any of the tissue types (P>0.05).CONCLUSIONS: Histologically, SCTGs did not show statistically significant differences in terms of their tissue composition depending on whether they were separated from the epithelial tissue by abrasion or by using a blade.