LAUSR

case and of split-mouth and parallel-arm designs investigating the impact of orthodontic treatment following periodontal treatment with either no comparison or comparison with no orthodontic treatment. Studies were participants being treated with or removable appliances, had been diagnosed with periodontitis and received periodontal treatment for tilted molars, intra-bony or furcation defects. Included studies needed to have a minimum mean follow-up time of 6 months with at least 10 participants for split-mouth studies or at least 10 participants in each treatment arm at follow-up; clinical examination also needed to occur at follow-up. The studies with participants who disorders that affect periodontal and orthodontic treatment, pre-clinical as where was for Background: Gingival recession, involving the lower inci-sors, is relatively common and can result in hypersensitivity, an aesthetic problem and may compromise the longevity of the tooth. There appears to be variation in the decision of when and if a gingival graft should be undertaken for patients with gingival recession for whom orthodontic treatment is being considered. Aim: This study was undertaken to compare the periodontal parameters outcomes after fixed orthodontic treatment in patients receiving subepithelial connective tissue grafts (SCTG) and compared with those not receiving root coverage procedures for an isolated tooth in the lower labial seg-ment with gingival recession, prior to orthodontic treatment. Method: This was a parallel randomised controlled clinical trial with a 1:1 allocation ratio. The trial involved 36 participants who were 36 systemically healthy patients with isolated labial gingival recession and anterior crowding of less than 4mm. The experimental group received SCTG three months prior to starting non-extraction fixed orthodontic treatment. The control group had non-extraction fixed orthodontic treatment only. Primary outcomes included change in recession depth, or gingival margin level, keratinised tissue width, root coverage, root aesthetic score and gingival phenotype. Patients were followed up for one year post-surgery. Secondary outcomes included gingival index, pocket depth, clinical attachment level, bleeding on probing, and patient reported outcomes for pain and hypersensitivity. Outcomes were measured before the CTG was placed, at the start of orthodontic treatment, mid-orthodontic treatment and at the end of levelling and aligning.Patients were allocated on a 1:1 ratio. Block randomisation was used and allocation was concealed using sealed