BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews of the literature are an increasingly important tool for providing evidence-based guidance to the practitioner. This review article and a companion paper deal with the surgical coverage of exposed root surfaces, but their aim is to promote a more up-to-date way of writing and publishing scientific articles in this field. This article presents the published data about surgical root coverage in table form and its aim is to identify updated minimum standards for data presentation. METHODS: Manual and computer-assisted searches were conducted to find the articles published on this topic during the 30-year period from 1970 to 2000. Articles that described the surgical procedure and reported at least the number of treated recessions and the duration of the follow-up, including case series, controlled studies, and randomized trials were selected and data were arranged in tables. RESULTS: Only 90 of the 290 articles that dealt with root coverage met the entry criteria; 25 of these were found only through manual searching. The overall clinical outcomes of different techniques appear to be satisfactory, but the published evidence is of little help in deciding which procedure is best suited for each clinical situation. Only a more homogeneous way of collecting and reporting clinical data and especially outcome measures will allow for an effective reanalysis which could help in everyday clinical decision making. Perhaps studies should be carried out and presented keeping in mind that the published results of sound clinical studies will, sooner or later, be reviewed and compared with other studies. CONCLUSION: A standard format with minimum requirements for data collection and presentation should be established and imposed by international journals in order to provide readers and researchers with more useful information.
BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews of the literature are an increasingly important tool for providing evidence-based guidance to the practitioner. This review article and a companion paper deal with the surgical coverage of exposed root surfaces, but their aim is to promote a more up-to-date way of writing and publishing scientific articles in this field. This article presents the published data about surgical root coverage in table form and its aim is to identify updated minimum standards for data presentation. METHODS: Manual and computer-assisted searches were conducted to find the articles published on this topic during the 30-year period from 1970 to 2000. Articles that described the surgical procedure and reported at least the number of treated recessions and the duration of the follow-up, including case series, controlled studies, and randomized trials were selected and data were arranged in tables. RESULTS: Only 90 of the 290 articles that dealt with root coverage met the entry criteria; 25 of these were found only through manual searching. The overall clinical outcomes of different techniques appear to be satisfactory, but the published evidence is of little help in deciding which procedure is best suited for each clinical situation. Only a more homogeneous way of collecting and reporting clinical data and especially outcome measures will allow for an effective reanalysis which could help in everyday clinical decision making. Perhaps studies should be carried out and presented keeping in mind that the published results of sound clinical studies will, sooner or later, be reviewed and compared with other studies. CONCLUSION: A standard format with minimum requirements for data collection and presentation should be established and imposed by international journals in order to provide readers and researchers with more useful information.
Authors: Brenda Y Herrera-Serna; Olga P López-Soto; Tatiana Chacón; Ana M Montoya-Gómez; Daniela Agudelo-Flórez; Oscar H Zuluaga-López Journal: J Clin Exp Dent Date: 2022-09-01