The RES system may be a useful tool to assess the esthetic outcome following root-coverage procedures.

Both treatments were effective in providing a significant reduction of the baseline recession and dentine hypersensitivity, with only limited intra-operative and post-operative morbidity and side effects. Adjunctive application of a CTG under a CAF increased the probability of achieving CRC in maxillary Miller Class I and II defects.

Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession-type defects.

Pini-Prato GP, Cairo F, Nieri M, Franceschi D, Rotundo R, Cortellini P. Coronally advanced flap versus connective tissue graft in the treatment of multiple gingival recessions: a split-mouth study with a 5-year follow-up. J Clin Periodontol 2010; 37: 644-650. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2010.01559.x Abstract Aim: The aim of this long-term study was to compare the clinical outcomes of coronally advanced flap (CAF) alone versus coronally advanced flap plus connective tissue graft (CAF1CTG) in the treatment of multiple gingival recessions using a splitmouth design over 5 years of follow-up. Materials and Methods: A total of 13 patients (mean age 31.4 years) showing multiple bilateral gingival recessions were treated. On one side, CAF1CTG was used, while in the contra-lateral side, a CAF alone was applied. Clinical outcomes were evaluated at the 6-month, 1-year and 5-year follow-ups. Results: A total of 93 Miller class I, II and III gingival recessions were treated. In the CAF1CTG-treated sites, the baseline gingival recession was 3.6 AE 1.3 mm, while in the CAF-treated sites, it was 2.9 AE 1.3 mm (p 5 0.0034). No difference in terms of the number of sites with complete root coverage (CRC) was reported (OR 5 0.49, p 5 0.1772) at the 6-month follow-up. At the 5-year follow-up, CAF1CTG-treated sites showed a higher percentage of sites with CRC (52%) than CAF-treated sites (35%) (OR 5 3.94; p 5 0.0239). An apical relapse of the gingival margin in CAFtreated sites was observed while a coronal improvement of the margin was noted in CAF1CTG-treated sites between the 6-month and the 5-year follow-ups. Conclusions: CAF1CTG provided better CRC than CAF alone in the treatment of multiple gingival recessions at the 5-year follow-up.

The location of the gingival margin relative to the cemento-enamel junction following CAF procedure seems to affect CRC.