Gum recession showdown: pinhole vs tunnel technique
NCT ID NCT04513041
First seen Jun 27, 2026 · Last updated Jun 27, 2026
Summary
This study compared two surgical techniques to treat receding gums: the pinhole technique and the tunnel technique. 21 adults with gum recession received both procedures on different teeth. The goal was to see which method better covered exposed roots and increased gum thickness after 6 months.
This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.
Study facts
What this study's own registry entry says, in plain language.
- Phase
-
Not a phased trial
Phase numbers describe drug development. The registry uses this when they do not apply, as it does for trials of devices, procedures or behaviour changes, and for observational studies.
- Participants
-
21 people
The number who actually took part.
- Started
-
Jun 2020
- Finished
-
Aug 2024
- Lead sponsor
-
Other sponsor
The registry's catch-all category, for sponsors it does not file as a company, a government agency, or a research network.
Who can take part
This study's own entry requirements. Only the study team can say for certain whether you qualify.
- Ages
-
18 to 75 years
- Sex
-
Anyone
- Healthy volunteers
-
Accepted
You do not need to have the condition being studied to take part.
Show the full entry requirements Hide the full entry requirements
Copied word for word from the study's registry entry, so the wording is the study team's rather than ours.
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
Get updates
Get notified about this study
Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for Gingival recession are added.
Genom att skicka in godkänner du våra Användarvillkor
Conditions
The condition(s) this trial relates to.
As listed by the trial registrant
The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.
Contacts and locations
Locations
-
University of Kentucky
Lexington, Kentucky, 40536, United States
More trials for these conditions
Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.
- Gum graft surgery: does the bed matter for thin gums?
- Boosting gum grafts: do blood or gel Add-Ons reduce shrinkage?
- Can a new flap technique better cover receding gums?
- A new twist on gum surgery could better cover exposed roots
- Gum graft boost: growth factors may strengthen receding gum repair
- Micro-needling vs. gum graft: a tiny trial tests a simpler fix for receding gums