Pinhole Versus Tunnel for Soft Tissue Recession

Comparison of Pinhole Surgical Technique and Tunnel Technique for the Treatment of Gingival Recession: A Split Mouth Clinical and Digital Study

This is an assessor-blinded split-mouth randomized clinical study to compare root coverage and gingival tissue thickness following two different surgical procedures for non-autologous grafting: the pinhole surgical technique (PST) and tunnel technique.

Each patient will undergo both surgeries on either quadrant; the PST and tunnel technique. The site will be randomized to receive either type of surgeries. Both types of surgeries are considered minimally invasive procedures to obtain root coverage for gingival recession. Both surgeries are clinically utilized in clinical practice and yield comparable results according to the literature, however, No prospective studies are published to compare between the outcomes of both techniques. patients will receive intra oral scan before the surgery and 6 months after the surgery to compare change in root coverage and gingival thickness outcomes between the two techniques. Post operative pain as well as patient satisfaction will be measured by visual analog scale and compared between the two techniques. Patients will be monitored at different time points to asses healing.

Inclusion Criteria:

• between 18-75 years old
• have at least one non-mobile tooth with Cairo class I gingival recession of 2 to 6 mm.
• American Society of Anesthesiology class I and II
• full mouth plaque score (FMPS) and full mouth bleeding score (FMBS) below 20%

Exclusion Criteria:

• sites of gingival recession around teeth that are non-salvageable
• presence of any exudate, infection or local inflammation around the area to be grafted
• pregnant or breastfeeding females