Comparing TCAF and MTUN With Soft Tissue Grafting for Treating Single Recessions in the Premandible

Not Applicable

Recruiting

• Conditions: Gingival Recession, Localized; Gingival Recession, Mucogingival Surgery; Gingival Recession Localized Moderate; Gingival Recession; Gingival Recession, Plastic Surgery

• Registration Number: NCT07158541
• Lead Sponsor: University Hospital, Ghent

Brief Summary

Multiple techniques can be used for recession coverage. The most common techniques for single recessions are : tunnel technique (T) and coronally advanced flap (CAF) both combined with a palatal graft to provide sufficient gingival thickness. Recently two modifications have been described in literature, namely the tunneled coronally advanced flap and the modified tunnel. MTUN will function as the control group while people treated with the TCAF technique will function as the test group.

This randomized controlled trial compares MTUN and TCAF to determine which technique provides better root coverage for receding gums at single recession in the premandible. The main question it aims to answer is:

\- What is the average root coverage achieved with each technique in the short and long term? This may be clinically relevant because covering gum recession can reduce tooth sensitivity, improve aesthetics and make oral hygiene easier.

Researchers will compare the modified tunnel technique (MTUN = the gum is undermined) with the tunneled coronally advanced flap (TCAF = the gum is undermined, only partially detached and repositioned higher). In both techniques, a small piece of tissue is removed from the palate, which is used to cover the recession. The purpose of the connective tissue graft under the flap/tunnel, is to increase thickness and provide support. Pain associated to the material used to cover the donorsite will be seen as the secondary research question. The site will either be covered by spongostan and multiple stitches or a palatal stent.

Participants will:

* Undergo surgery (MTUN or TCAF, randomly assigned) to cover recessions

* Attend regular check-ups for up to 10 years after surgery

* Keep a postoperative journal (recording medication use, pain levels, tooth sensitivity, etc.)

Detailed Description

Not available

Study Timeline

• Status Verified: 2025-08
• Study Start: 2025-08-25
• Study First Submitted: 2025-08-28
• Study First Submitted QC: 2025-09-04
• Last Update Submitted: 2025-09-04
• Study First Posted: 2025-09-08
• Last Update Posted: 2025-09-08
• Primary Completion: 2037-12-31
• Study Completion: 2037-12-31

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: RECRUITING
• Sex: All
• Target Recruitment: 24

Inclusion Criteria

• at least 18 years old
• good oral hygiene
• presence of one recession in the premandible
• good general health

Exclusion Criteria

• smoker
• pregnant women (assessed at each visit; if the patient appears pregnant during follow-up, x-rays will not be taken)

Study & Design

• Study Type: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Design: PARALLEL

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
mean root coverage	From enrollment up to ten years after surgical treatment.	The average percentage of previously exposed tooth root surface that becomes covered by gingival tissue following a root coverage procedure.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
complete root coverage	From enrollment up to ten years after surgical treatment.	The percentage of teeth for which the previously exposed root surface is completely covered by gingival tissue following the surgical procedure. These teeth show no visible recession after healing.
pocket depth	From enrollment up to ten years after surgical treatment.	The distance from the gingival margin to the bottom of the sulcus by use of a periodontal probe.
recession reduction	From enrollment up to ten years after surgical treatment.	The decrease in the amount of exposed root surface after the root coverage procedure.
width of keratinized tissue	From enrollment up to ten years after surgical treatment.	The distance from the mucogingival junction to the free gingival margin. It includes free and attached gingival tissue, measured by use of a periodontal probe.
phenotype	From enrollment up to ten years after surgical treatment.	thin, thick or combined
gingival thickness	From enrollment up to ten years after surgical treatment.	Thickness of the gingival tissue measured 1-2mm apical to the gingival margin.
treatment time	Only measured during surgery in minutes.	Time in minutes from the first incision up to the last suture
post-operative pain at the donor site	From one week post-operative up to three months post-operative.	Post-operative pain at the donor site will be assessed by the patient using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst imaginable pain). A higher score indicates greater pain experienced by the patient.
post-operative pain at the recession site	From one week post-operative up to three months post-operative.	Post-operative pain at the recession site will be assessed by the patient using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst imaginable pain). A higher score indicates greater pain experienced by the patient.
number of analgesics	From one week post-operative up to two weeks post-operative.	The number of pain medication tablets consumed by the patient to manage post-operative pain.
score of aesthetic result	From six months post-operative up to ten years post-operative.	Aesthetic satisfaction based on root coverage and color match.
root sensitivity	From one week pre-operative up to ten years post-operative.	Root sensitivity is assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), raging from 0 (no sensitivity) to 10 (extreme sensitivity), based on a tactile test with controlled air flow. A higher score indicates that the patient experiences greater sensitivity.
willingness to retreat	From three months post-operative up to two years post-operative.	A patient's willingness to undergo retreatment based on their previous experience with the procedure. It is assessed by use of the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) ranging from 0 (not willing at all) to 10 (extremely willing). A patient reporting a higher score indicates greater willingness.

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

Department of Periodontology and Implantology of Ghent University; 🇧🇪 Ghent, Oost-Vlaanderen, Belgium