RESUMO
@#Gingival recessions (GRs) result in root hypersensitivity, root surface caries, and esthetic problems. Various root coverage surgeries are being developed for periodontal plastic therapy. The tunnel technique (TUN) is one of the most widely applied surgeries due to its features of being minimally invasive, practical, excellent outcomes and long-term stability; however, there are still some limitations of this technique. The history and evolution from the envelope flap to TUN, including its efficiency when compared with coronally advanced flaps with a connective tissue graft (CTG), are reviewed in this paper. The limitations of TUN are discussed in consideration of our clinical experience; for example, there is high technique sensitivity when TUN is applied in GR>5 mm because of the great difficulty in covering the grafts. The advantages of surgical access, including vertical incisions in the vestibule, “W” type and pinhole access, are discussed for different situations. Mattress sutures and sling sutures in a single tooth or multiple teeth are applied in TUN. The different types of grafts, such as CTG, platelet-rich plasma, articular dermal matrix and xenogeneic collagen matrix, are described. Mechanical, chemical and biological conditioning of the root surface are recommended during surgery. Protecting the surgical area and taking antibiotics postoperatively are also very important. Finally, the modifications when TUN is applied with other kinds of techniques are discussed, including lateral closed TUN, laterally positioned flaps, double papilla flaps and frenuloplasty. Minimally invasive, esthetic, long-term stability and simplified techniques are the development trends of TUN in the future.
RESUMO
Objective @#To compare the clinical effect of the tunnel technique (TUN) and vestibular incision subperiosteal tunnel access (VISTA) combining connective tissue grafts (CTGs) on recovering the exposed root surface in a case of gingival recession over the upper anterior teeth and then to provide clinical evidence for gingival recession treatment. @*Methods@# A case of gingival recession (Miller I type) over teeth 13-14 and 22-23 was treated using different techniques bilaterally. 22-23 were treated by a TUN combined CTG transplantation,while teeth 13-14 were treated by a VISTA technique combined with CTG transplantation. The gingival retraction height (GRH), gingival retraction width (GRW), keratinized gingival width (KW), root coverage aesthetic score (RES) and visual analog scale (VAS) were measured after operation. @*Results @#The effect of post-operation were ideal and complete ginglval recovering were achieved, the postoperative effects of the two methods were stable, GRH and GRW decreased, and KW increased. RES was 10. The VAS score of VISTA combined with CTG transplantation was 6, which was higher than that of TUN+CTG. @*Conclusion@#Gingival recession can be treated by TUN+CTG or VISTA+CTG with ideal prognosis. VISTA with an additional incision facilitates the operative procedure but leads to less comfort.