Clinical and aesthetic outcomes of enamel matrix derivative and subepithelial connective tissue graft using the modified coronally advanced tunnel technique
a randomized controlled trial
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-7765-2025-0775Keywords:
Gingival recession, Graft, Enamel matrix proteins, Minimally invasive surgical procedures, Subepithelial connective tissueAbstract
Objectives This randomized controlled clinical trial evaluated the short-term clinical outcomes of the modified coronally advanced tunnel technique combined with three different regenerative approaches—subepithelial connective tissue graft (as the gold standard), enamel matrix derivative (as a donor-site-sparing alternative), and their combination (to explore potential synergistic effects)—in treating recession type 1 gingival defects. Methodology A total of 52 systemically healthy patients (aged 18–60) with 90 recession type 1 gingival defects were enrolled and randomly assigned to one of the three treatment groups: Group 1 (n=18; subepithelial connective tissue graft), Group 2 (n=19; enamel matrix derivative), and Group 3 (n=15; both materials). Primary outcome consisted of the percentage of root coverage at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included plaque index, gingival index, gingival recession depth, gingival recession width, clinical attachment level, keratinized tissue width, gingival thickness, wound healing index, probing depth, and root coverage aesthetic score. Clinical parameters were measured at baseline, 3, and 6 months, and aesthetic outcomes were assessed at 6 months. Results All groups showed significant improvements in clinical parameters. Mean root coverage was 80.4% for Group 1, 76.2% for Group 2, and 73.6% for Group 3, with no significant differences among them. Keratinized tissue width significantly increased in Group 1 and Group 3, but not in Group 2. Mean root coverage aesthetic score values were 7.74 ± 2.35, 7.54 ± 2.39, and 7.62 ± 1.97, respectively (p > 0.05). Conclusion Within the limitations of this study, including its short-term follow-up period and baseline differences in recession width, all three groups exhibited comparable clinical and aesthetic outcomes at 6 months. Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT06504329
Downloads
References
1- Marschner F, Lechte C, Kanzow P, Hraský V, Pfister W. Systematic review and meta-analysis on prevalence and risk factors for gingival recession. J Dent. 2025;155:105645. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2025.105645
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2025.105645
2- Barootchi S, Tavelli L. Tunneled coronally advanced flap for the treatment of isolated gingival recessions with deficient papilla. Int J Esthet Dent. 2022;17(1):14-26.
3- Barootchi S, Tavelli L, Vinueza MEG, Sabri H, Andrade C, Pinto N, et al. Autologous platelet concentrates in root coverage procedures. Periodontol 2000. 2025;97(1):215-35. doi: 10.1111/prd.12614
» https://doi.org/10.1111/prd.12614
4- Chambrone L, Tatakis DN. Long-term outcomes of untreated buccal gingival recessions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Periodontol. 2016;87(7):796-808. doi: 10.1902/jop.2016.150625
» https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2016.150625
5- Dias AT, Menezes CC, Kahn S, Fischer RG, Figueredo CM, Fernandes GV. Gingival recession treatment with enamel matrix derivative associated with coronally advanced flap and subepithelial connective tissue graft: a split-mouth randomized controlled clinical trial with molecular evaluation. Clin Oral Investig. 2022;26(2):1453-63. doi: 10.1007/s00784-021-04119-9
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-021-04119-9
6- Pini Prato G, Di Gianfilippo R. Challenges and success in periodontal plastic surgery. J Clin Periodontol. 2023;50(12):1572-81. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.13869
» https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.13869
7- Pradhan S, Shetty N, Kamath D. Comparison of coronally advanced flap with chorion membrane vs coronally advanced flap with connective tissue graft in the treatment of multiple gingival recessions: a split-mouth randomised controlled study. F1000Res. 2022;11:533. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.110829.1
» https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.110829.1
8- Marques T, Santos N, Sousa M, Fernandes JC, Fernandes GV. Mixed-Thickness Tunnel Access (MiTT) through a linear vertical mucosal incision for a minimally invasive approach for root coverage procedures in anterior and posterior sites: technical description and case series with 1-year follow-up. Dent J (Basel). 2023;11(10):235. doi: 10.3390/dj11100235
» https://doi.org/10.3390/dj11100235
9- Aroca S, Molnár B, Windisch P, Gera I, Salvi GE, Nikolidakis D, et al. Treatment of multiple adjacent Miller class I and II gingival recessions with a modified coronally advanced tunnel (MCAT) technique and a collagen matrix or palatal connective tissue graft: a randomized, controlled clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol. 2013;40(7):713-20. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12112
» https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12112
10- Sculean A, Cosgarea R, Stähli A, Katsaros C, Arweiler NB, Brecx M, et al. The modified coronally advanced tunnel combined with an enamel matrix derivative and subepithelial connective tissue graft for the treatment of isolated mandibular Miller Class I and II gingival recessions: a report of 16 cases. Quintessence Int. 2014;45(10):829-35. doi: 10.3290/j.qi.a32636
» https://doi.org/10.3290/j.qi.a32636
11- Aroca S, Keglevich T, Nikolidakis D, Gera I, Nagy K, Azzi R, et al. Treatment of class III multiple gingival recessions: a randomized-clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol. 2010;37(1):88-97. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2009.01492.x
» https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2009.01492.x
12- Sculean A, Cosgarea R, Stähli A, Katsaros C, Arweiler NB, Miron RJ, et al. Treatment of multiple adjacent maxillary Miller Class I, II, and III gingival recessions with the modified coronally advanced tunnel, enamel matrix derivative, and subepithelial connective tissue graft: a report of 12 cases. Quintessence Int. 2016;47(8):653-9. doi: 10.3290/j.qi.a36562
» https://doi.org/10.3290/j.qi.a36562
13- Cairo F, Nieri M, Cincinelli S, Mervelt J, Pagliaro U. The interproximal clinical attachment level to classify gingival recessions and predict root coverage outcomes: an explorative and reliability study. J Clin Periodontol. 2011;38(7):661-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2011.01732.x
» https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2011.01732.x
14- Tavelli L, Barootchi S, Nguyen TV, Tattan M, Ravidà A, Wang HL. Efficacy of tunnel technique in the treatment of localized and multiple gingival recessions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Periodontol. 2018;89(9):1075-90. doi: 10.1002/JPER.18-0066
» https://doi.org/10.1002/JPER.18-0066
15- Cairo F, Barootchi S, Tavelli L, Barbato L, Wang HL, Rasperini G, et al. Aesthetic- and patient-related outcomes following root coverage procedures: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Clin Periodontol. 2020;47(11):1403-15. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.13346
» https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.13346
16- Tavelli L, Barootchi S, Stefanini M, Zucchelli G, Giannobile WV, Wang HL. Wound healing dynamics, morbidity, and complications of palatal soft-tissue harvesting. Periodontol 2000. 2023;92(1):90-119. doi: 10.1111/prd.12466
» https://doi.org/10.1111/prd.12466
17- Miron RJ, Shirakata Y, Ahmad P, Romandini M, Estrin NE, Farshidfar N, et al. 30 years of enamel matrix derivative: mimicking tooth development as a clinical concept. Periodontol 2000. 2025;98(1):7-26. doi: 10.1111/prd.12635
» https://doi.org/10.1111/prd.12635
18- Miron RJ, Sculean A, Cochran DL, Froum S, Zucchelli G, Nemcovsky C, et al. Twenty years of enamel matrix derivative: the past, the present and the future. J Clin Periodontol. 2016;43(8):668-83. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12546
» https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12546
19- Shirakata Y, Nakamura T, Shinohara Y, Nakamura-Hasegawa K, Hashiguchi C, Takeuchi N, et al. Split-mouth evaluation of connective tissue graft with or without enamel matrix derivative for the treatment of isolated gingival recession defects in dogs. Clin Oral Investig. 2019;23(8):3339-49. doi: 10.1007/s00784-018-2750-1
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-018-2750-1
20- Tonetti MS, Fourmousis I, Suvan J, Cortellini P, Brägger U, Lang NP. Healing, post-operative morbidity and patient perception of outcomes following regenerative therapy of deep intrabony defects. J Clin Periodontol. 2004;31(12):1092-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2004.00615.x
» https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2004.00615.x
21- Xiang C, Zhang L, Tao E. Research progress of enamel matrix derivative on periodontal tissue regeneration: a narrative review. Front Dent Med. 2025;6:1611402. doi: 10.3389/fdmed.2025.1611402
» https://doi.org/10.3389/fdmed.2025.1611402
22- Paolantonio M. Treatment of gingival recessions by combined periodontal regenerative technique, guided tissue regeneration, and subpedicle connective tissue graft: a comparative clinical study. J Periodontol. 2002;73(1):53-62. doi: 10.1902/jop.2002.73.1.53
» https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2002.73.1.53
23- Cetiner D, Parlar A, Balos K, Alpar R. Comparative clinical study of connective tissue graft and two types of bioabsorbable barriers in the treatment of localized gingival recessions. J Periodontol. 2003;74(8):1196-205. doi: 10.1902/jop.2003.74.8.1196
» https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2003.74.8.1196
24- Zucchelli G, Clauser C, De Sanctis M, Calandriello M. Mucogingival versus guided tissue regeneration procedures in the treatment of deep recession type defects. J Periodontol. 1998;69(2):138-45. doi: 10.1902/jop.1998.69.2.138
» https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1998.69.2.138
25- Yarkaç FU, Sen DÖ, Yildirim K, Eroglu ZT, Babayigit O. Comparison of clinical and esthetic results of different techniques in the treatment of multiple gingival recessions. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2025;37(11):2358-67. doi: 10.1111/jerd.70018
» https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.70018
26- Silness J, Löe H. Periodontal disease in pregnancy II: correlation between oral hygiene and periodontal condition. Acta Odontol Scand. 1964;22(1):121-35. doi: 10.3109/00016356408993968
» https://doi.org/10.3109/00016356408993968
27- Bozkurt Dogan S, Öngöz Dede F, Balli U, Atalay EN, Durmuslar MC. Concentrated growth factor in the treatment of adjacent multiple gingival recessions: a split-mouth randomized clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol. 2015;42(9):868-75. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12444
» https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12444
28- Din F, Kabalak MÖ, Yilmaz BT, Baris E, Avci H, Çaglayan F, et al. Efficacy of different gingival graft de-epithelialization methods: a parallel-group randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig. 2025;29(6):289. doi: 10.1007/s00784-025-06365-7
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-025-06365-7
29- Cairo F, Rotundo R, Miller PD, Pini Prato GP. Root coverage esthetic score: a system to evaluate the esthetic outcome of the treatment of gingival recession through evaluation of clinical cases. J Periodontol. 2009;80(4):705-10. doi: 10.1902/jop.2009.080565
» https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2009.080565
30- Aroca S, Zucchelli G, Di Domenico GL, de Sanctis M. Decision tree for the treatment of multiple gingival recession defects when utilizing MCAT or MCAF based on evidence and clinical experience. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2025;45(5):600-15. doi: 10.11607/prd.7290
» https://doi.org/10.11607/prd.7290
31- Górski B, Górska R, Wysokinska-Miszczuk J, Kaczynski T. Tunnel technique with enamel matrix derivative in addition to subepithelial connective tissue graft compared with connective tissue graft alone for the treatment of multiple gingival recessions: a randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig. 2020;24(12):4475-86. doi: 10.1007/s00784-020-03312-6
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03312-6
32- Mauricio JM, Furquim CP, Bustillos-Torrez W, Soto-Peñaloza D, Peñarrocha-Oltra D, Retamal-Valdes B, et al. Does enamel matrix derivative application provide additional clinical benefits in the treatment of maxillary Miller class I and II gingival recession? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Investig. 2021;25(4):1613-26. doi: 10.1007/s00784-021-03782-2
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-021-03782-2
33- Stähli A, Duong HY, Imber JC, Roccuzzo A, Salvi GE, Katsaros C, et al. Recession coverage using the modified coronally advanced tunnel and connective tissue graft with or without enamel matrix derivative: 5-year results of a randomised clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig. 2023;27(1):105-13. doi: 10.1007/s00784-022-04691-8
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-022-04691-8
34- Shanbhag S, Stødle IH, Lie SA, Sanz M, Verket A. Histological outcomes of root coverage procedures: a systematic review with meta-analysis. J Periodontal Res. 2025. doi: 10.1111/jre.70043
» https://doi.org/10.1111/jre.70043
35- Bruno JF, Bowers GM. Histology of a human biopsy section following the placement of a subepithelial connective tissue graft. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2000;20(3):225-31.
36- Górski B, Górska R, Szerszen M, Kaczynski T. Modified coronally advanced tunnel technique with enamel matrix derivative in addition to subepithelial connective tissue graft compared with connective tissue graft alone for the treatment of multiple gingival recessions: prognostic parameters for clinical treatment outcomes. Clin Oral Investig. 2022;26(1):673-88. doi: 10.1007/s00784-021-04045-w
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-021-04045-w
37- Imber JC, Kasaj A. Treatment of gingival recession: when and how? Int Dent J. 2021;71(3):178-87. doi: 10.1111/idj.12617
» https://doi.org/10.1111/idj.12617
38- Trullenque-Eriksson A, Derks J, Andersson JS. Onset of periodontitis: a registry-based cohort study. Clin Oral Investig. 2023;27(5):2187-95. doi: 10.1007/s00784-023-04923-5
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-023-04923-5
39- Stähli A, Imber JC, Raptis E, Salvi GE, Eick S, Sculean A. Effect of enamel matrix derivative on wound healing following gingival recession coverage using the modified coronally advanced tunnel and subepithelial connective tissue graft: a randomised, controlled, clinical study. Clin Oral Investig. 2020;24(2):1043-51. doi: 10.1007/s00784-019-03008-6
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-019-03008-6
40- Henriques PS, Pelegrine AA, Nogueira AA, Borghi MM. Application of subepithelial connective tissue graft with or without enamel matrix derivative for root coverage: a split-mouth randomized study. J Oral Sci. 2010;52(3):463-71. doi: 10.2334/josnusd.52.463
» https://doi.org/10.2334/josnusd.52.463
41- Aroca S, Di Domenico GL, Darnaud C, de Sanctis M. Modified coronally advanced tunnel technique with site-specific application of connective tissue graft for the treatment of multiple adjacent maxillary gingival recessions: a case series. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2021;41(2):253-9. doi: 10.11607/prd.4836
» https://doi.org/10.11607/prd.4836
42- Zucchelli G, Tavelli L, McGuire MK, Rasperini G, Feinberg SE, Wang HL, et al. Autogenous soft tissue grafting for periodontal and peri-implant plastic surgical reconstruction. J Periodontol. 2020;91(1):9-16. doi: 10.1002/JPER.19-0350
» https://doi.org/10.1002/JPER.19-0350
43- Cabrera P, Fernandes GV. A 37-year retrospective assessment of connective tissue grafting: what have we learned? A case report. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2025;45(6):746-55. doi: 10.11607/prd.7744
» https://doi.org/10.11607/prd.7744
44- Stefanini M, Zucchelli G, Marzadori M, de Sanctis M. Coronally advanced flap with site-specific application of connective tissue graft for the treatment of multiple adjacent gingival recessions: a 3-year follow-up case series. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2018;38(1):25-33. doi: 10.11607/prd.3438
» https://doi.org/10.11607/prd.3438
45- Lee JH, Kim YT. Modified tunnel technique with and without enamel matrix derivative for deep and narrow gingival recession in the mandibular anterior region: a 3-year longitudinal and retrospective cohort population-based study. J Periodontal Implant Sci. 2025;55(4):295. doi: 10.5051/jpis.2400760038
» https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2400760038
46- Bakhishov H, Isler SC, Bozyel B, Yildirim B, Tekindal MA, Ozdemir B. De-epithelialized gingival graft versus subepithelial connective tissue graft in the treatment of multiple adjacent gingival recessions using the tunnel technique: 1-year results of a randomized clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol. 2021;48(7):970-83. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.13452
» https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.13452
47- Tavelli L, Barootchi S, Cairo F, Rasperini G, Shedden K, Wang HL. The effect of time on root coverage outcomes: a network meta-analysis. J Dent Res. 2019;98(11):1195-203. doi: 10.1177/0022034519867071
» https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034519867071
48- Elbana A, Saleh W, Youssef J. Comparing connective tissue grafts and collagen matrix in modified coronally advanced tunnel technique for RT1 gingival recession: a randomized controlled clinical trial. BMC Oral Health. 2025;25(1):893. doi: 10.1186/s12903-025-06259-w
» https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-025-06259-w
49- Würflein E, Ollinger S, Sculean A, Vach K, Landwehr VC, Nelson K, et al. Modified coronally advanced tunnel technique with porcine dermal matrix for recession treatment: 12-month follow-up. Clin Exp Dent Res. 2025;11(5):e70199. doi: 10.1002/cre2.70199
» https://doi.org/10.1002/cre2.70199
50- Mayta-Tovalino F, Barboza JJ, Pasupuleti V, Hernandez AV. Efficacy of tunnel technique (TUN) versus coronally advanced flap (CAF) in the management of multiple gingival recession defects: a meta-analysis. Int J Dent. 2023;2023:8671484. doi: 10.1155/2023/8671484
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Todo o conteúdo do periódico, exceto onde está identificado, está licenciado sob uma Licença Creative Commons do tipo atribuição CC-BY.
