Comparison of two types of xenogeneic matrices to treat single gingival recessions: A randomized clinical trial

Treatment of Localized Gingival Recession with an Enamel Matrix Protein-Coated Xenogeneic Dermal Matrix: A Randomized Controlled Trial

This study aims to evaluate the influence of the additional use of enamel matrix derivate (EMD) in the treatment of gingival recession defects using a coronally advanced flap (CAF) and a xenogeneic dermal matrix (XDM) by means of digital and clinical assessment methods. In this prospective randomized controlled study, recession height and area, width and thickness of keratinized gingiva, pocket probing depth, and clinical attachment levels were measured at the baseline and followed up for one year. Fifteen patients (n = 15) with 24 gingival recession defects were treated between 2019 and 2021. On average, the digitally assessed root coverage of the control group (CAF + XDM) was not significantly different compared to the test group (CAF + XDM + EMD), with 69 ± 28% and 36 ± 32%, respectively (p = 0.094). One year postoperatively, there were no differences found regarding keratinized tissue width (KTW) between the control group and test group (p = 0.690). However, the control group showed superior results in the thickness of keratinized gingiva (p = 0.044). The present study showed that there were no statistically significant differences in the root coverage results in the CAF + XDM + EMD group compared to the CAF + XDM group. The adjunctive use of EMD to a CAF and XDM in the treatment of gingival recession defects does not appear to have any clinical benefit.

Attachment Gain After Applying Xenogeneic Acellular Dermal Matrix in the Management of Isolated Recessions: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Background and objectives Mucogingival plastic surgery is a surgical procedure performed to prevent or correct anatomical, developmental, or traumatic defects. The problem of gingival recession is common in dental practice, causing pain and dentin hypersensitivity for the patient, and remains difficult to treat surgically at the second surgical site used to harvest the connective graft. Many alternatives have been used to replace connective grafts, but none have been as effective. The importance of guided tissue regeneration remains to gain attachment because it means the formation of new periodontal tissue. This study aims to evaluate the attachment gain (AG) obtained after the management of single gingival recessions of Class I and Class II of Miller's classification. Material and methods This study was designed as a clinical randomized trial using a split-mouth technique. The study sample included 15 patients (30 symmetrical gingival recessions). The first group included the coronally advanced flap (CAF) with the connective tissue graft (CTG), and the second group included the CAF with the Xenogeneic Acellular Dermal Matrix (XDM) (Mucoderm®, Botiss Biomaterials, Zossen, Germany). AG was measured at baseline and after six months. Results The results showed that the mean relative attachment level at baseline was 8.333±0.899 in the CTG+CAF group and 8.466±0.833 in the XDM+CAF group. After six months of follow-up, the levels remained 8.333±0.899 in the CTG+CAF group and 8.466±0.833 in the XDM+CAF group, with a significant difference between the study groups after six months. Conclusion The current study concluded that both grafts applied with the coronally advanced flap led to a gain in attachment, with a greater gain in the CTG group.

Xenogeneic collagen matrix vs. connective tissue graft for the treatment of multiple gingival recession: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The aim of this systematic review (SR) compared the effect of xenogeneic collagen matrix (XCM) vs. connective tissue graft (CTG) for the treatment of multiple gingival recession (MGR) Miller Class I and II or Cairo type I. Five databases were searched up to August 2022 for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing the clinical effects of XCM vs. CTG in the treatment of MGR. The random effects model of mean differences was used to determine reduction of gingival recession (GR), gain in keratinized tissue width (KTW), gain in gingival thickness (GT) and gain in clinical attachment level (CAL). The risk ratio was used to complete root coverage (CRC) at 6 and 12 months. 10 RCTs, representing 1095 and 649 GR at 6 and 12 months, respectively, were included in this SR. The meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference in GR reduction, KTW gain GT gain or CAL gain between groups at 6 months. However, at 12 months of follow-up, differences favoring the control group were observed (p < 0.05). CRC was significantly higher in the CTG group at 6 and 12 months. Regarding dentine hypersensitivity (DH), no statistically significant differences were found between groups at 6 and 12 months of follow-up (p < 0.05). At 12 months, CTG showed significantly superior clinical results in the treatment of MGR: however, this difference was not observed in the decrease of DH.

Guided coronally advanced flap to treat gingival recession: Digital workflow and case report

BACKGROUND

The inherently technique-sensitive nature of periodontal plastic procedures demands a significant level of skill and expertise. The incorporation of three-dimensional (3D) printing technologies emerges as a potential strategy to optimize and simplify surgical procedures. This case report describes the digital workflow and presents the clinical outcomes achieved using a guided coronally advanced flap for the treatment of a single gingival recession (GR).

METHODS AND RESULTS

A female patient with a gingival recession type 1 (RT1 B-) defect on the mandibular second left premolar underwent successful treatment using a guided coronally advanced flap (g-CAF) and de-epithelized connective tissue graft (CTG). The digital planning included intraoral scanning of the mandible and hard palate using an intraoral scanner, with resulting polygon format (PLY) files exported for virtual model creation. The CAF guide was meticulously designed to orient horizontal and vertical incisions at the papillae base adjacent to the GR defect. For the donor site, a guide was specifically created, positioning the graft area 2 mm apically to the premolars' gingival margins. The delineation of this area involved two horizontal and vertical incisions, meticulously based on the dimensions of the GR. The digitally designed guides were then 3D-printed using a surgical guide-specific resin, contributing to the precise execution of the innovative surgical approach. Complete root coverage was achieved.

CONCLUSION

This case report demonstrates that g-CAF can be a promising approach for the treatment of single GR.

HIGHLIGHTS

Why is this case new information? To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first manuscript to report a guided procedure for the treatment of gingival recession. This report provides the digital workflow for the fabrication of a guide to perform the coronally advanced flap for single recession defects. What are the keys to successfully manage this case? It is necessary to adequately scan the recession defect area and palate. Properly not only design the guide using specific software but also print it. The guide has to be stable when in position for the surgical procedure. What are the primary limitations of this technique? This guide was designed to help surgeons during the incisions. However, it does not provide aid to split and release the flap and suture.

Soft Tissue Substitutes in Periodontal and Peri-Implant Soft Tissue Augmentation: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Different extracellular matrix (ECM)-based technologies in periodontal and peri-implant soft tissue augmentation have been proposed in the market. The present review compared the efficacy of soft tissue substitutes (STSs) and autogenous free gingival grafts (FGGs) or connective tissue grafts (CTGs) in mucogingival procedures to increase keratinized tissue (KT) width around teeth and implants.

METHODS

Two independent examiners performed an electronic search on MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library based on the following PICOS format: (P) adult patients; (I) soft tissue substitutes and FGGs/CTGs; (C) STSs vs. CTGs; STSs vs. FGGs; STSs vs control; (O) KT width gain; (S) systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials. Studies published before November 2023 were included.

RESULTS

Around teeth, all biomaterials showed superior performance compared to a coronally advanced flap (CAF) alone for treating gingival recessions. However, when compared to CTGs, acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) yield the most similar outcomes to the gold standard (CTGs), even though in multiple recessions, CTGs continue to be considered the most favorable approach. The use of STSs (acellular matrix or tissue-engineered) in combination with apically positioned flaps (APF) resulted in significantly less gain in KT width compared to that achieved with FGGs and APFs. Around dental implants, free gingival grafts were deemed more effective than soft tissue substitutes in enhancing keratinized mucosa width.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the available evidence, questions remain about the alternative use of soft tissue substitutes for conventional grafting procedures using free gingival grafts or connective tissue grafts around teeth and implants.

Multiple gingival recessions associated with non-carious cervical lesions treated by partial restoration and modified coronally advanced flap with either connective tissue graft or xenogeneic acellular dermal matrix: A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare a connective tissue graft (CTG) to a (porcine) xenogeneic acellular dermal matrix (XDM), both associated with modified coronally advanced flap (MCAF) and partial resin composite restoration to treat multiple combined defects (CDs).

METHODS

Seventy-eight defects in 38 patients presenting multiple combined defects, that is, gingival recession associated with non-carious cervical lesions, were treated by partial resin composite restoration (apical margin up to 1 mm of the estimated cement-enamel junction) and MCAF along with CTG or XDM. After 6 months, the groups were compared with regard to clinical, patient-centered, and esthetic outcomes.

RESULTS

CD coverage was 72.9% for CTG versus 50.7% for XDM (P < 0.001). Recession reduction was 2.3 mm for CTG versus 1.5 mm for XDM (P < 0.001). CTG resulted in a greater increase in keratinized tissue width (CTG: 0.96 mm vs. XDM: 0.3 mm, P = 0.04) and gingival thickness (CTG: 0.9 mm vs. XDM: 0.3 mm, P < 0.001). Both treatments successfully reduced dentin hypersensitivity and increased esthetics satisfaction, with no statistically significant intergroup differences. Moreover, XDM patients experienced a shorter surgery duration (CTG: 57.2 min vs. XDM: 37.4 min, P < 0.001) and less time to no pain (visual analog scale  =  0; CTG: 6.5 days vs. XDM: 3.5 days, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

CTG resulted in significantly greater root coverage and increased keratinized tissue width compared to XDM for treating multiple partially restored CDs. However, increased root coverage at the CTG sites was accounted for by increased probing depth compared to the XDM sites.

Evaluation of a novel restorative protocol to treat non-carious cervical lesion associated with gingival recession: a 2-year follow-up randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare 2 different resin composites and 2 adhesive systems used in a new restorative protocol (partial restoration) to treat non-carious cervical lesions associated with gingival recession type 1 (RT1).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Eighty combined defects (CDs) were treated with a partial restoration and periodontal plastic surgery for root coverage. The CDs were randomly assigned to one of the following groups: NP + TE (n = 20), nanofilled composite and 2-step total-etch adhesive system; NP + UA (n = 20), nanofilled composite and universal adhesive system; MH + TE (n = 20), microhybrid composite and 2-step total-etch adhesive; MH + UA (n = 20), microhybrid composite and universal adhesive. Restorations were assessed using the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria at 1 week (baseline) and 6, 12, and 24 months. Survival rate, periodontal parameters, dentin hypersensitivity (DH), and aesthetics were also evaluated.

RESULTS

After 24 months, only the MH + TE group did not lose any restoration, with no significant differences between groups. For surface roughness parameter, MH presented 83.3% of the restorations scoring Bravo, whereas NP presented 48.5% of the restorations scoring Bravo. All groups presented restorations with marginal discoloration. All periodontal parameters behaved similarly, regardless of the restorative material. All groups presented significant reductions of dentin hypersensitivity and improved aesthetic perceptions (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Both resin composites and adhesives tested can be combined for partial restorations to treat CDs.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This new restorative-surgical protocol to treat CDs presents satisfactory outcomes. The partial restorations can be successfully executed with both combinations of adhesives and resin composites evaluated in this investigation. TRN : ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT03215615; registration date July 12, 2017.

Soft-Tissue Augmentation around Dental Implants with a Connective Tissue Graft (CTG) and Xenogeneic Collagen Matrix (CMX)-5-Year Follow-Up

Proper horizontal and vertical thickness of the gingival connective tissue has been proven to be one of the success criteria in dental implant and reconstructive surgery. When thin tissue is found, gingiva augmentation methods can be used to increase the quality and volume of the tissue. Many methods have been described, among them pedicle soft-tissue flaps or autogenic tissue grafts. As an alternative to patients' own tissue, xenogenic materials can be used for grafting. The fundamental issue is to choose a material that will ensure the maximum therapeutic effect, while also minimizing the negative influence on the patient's health. The aim of this study was to compare gingival augmentation procedures using a palatal connective tissue graft (CTG) and an xenogenic soft-tissue substitute, Geistlich Mucograft (xenogeneic collagen matrix; CMX), and assess whether the timing of the graft surgery influences the clinical outcomes. The original study was a randomized control trial with a total of 75 implants placed. The patients received the soft-tissue thickening 3 months before the implant placement or 3 months after the implant placement (depending on the group). A connective tissue graft (CTG) or Geistlich Mucograft were used (depending on the group). For both the CTG and Geistlich Mucograft, better clinical outcomes were observed for maintaining the alveolar bone level and the thickness of the attached gingiva compared to the control group with no gingival augmentation. The Geistlich Mucograft showed good clinical performance in comparison to the control. Soft-tissue augmentation with the CTG before the implant placement was found to be most efficient method in terms of a stable increase of the tissue thickness since, throughout the entire observation period, the greatest increase of 1.035 mm (SD = 0.73 mm) in thickness was observed. Statistically important differences in the tissue thickness baseline compared after 5 years were observed for groups G1 vs. G2b (no augmentation vs. CTG before), G1 vs. G3b (no augmentation vs. CTG after) and for groups G2b vs. G3a (CTG before vs. CMX after).

Recombinant human platelet-derived growth factor improves root coverage of a collagen matrix for multiple adjacent gingival recessions: A triple-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of recombinant human platelet-derived growth factor (rhPDGF)-BB combined with a cross-linked collagen matrix (CCM) for the treatment of multiple adjacent gingival recession type 1 defects (MAGRs) in combination with the coronally advanced flap (CAF).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty patients were enrolled in this triple-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial and treated with either CAF + CCM + rhPDGF, or CAF + CCM + saline. The primary outcome was mean root coverage (mRC) at 6 months. Complete root coverage, gain in gingival thickness (GT), keratinized tissue width, volumetric and ultrasonographic changes, and patient-reported outcome measures were also assessed. Mixed-modelling regression analyses were used for statistical comparisons.

RESULTS

At 6 months, the mRC of the CCM + rhPDGF and CCM alone groups were 88.25% and 77.72%, respectively (p = .02). A significant gain in GT was consistently observed for both treatment arms, and more so for the patients receiving the matrix containing rhPDGF through time (0.51 vs. 0.80 mm, on average, p = .01). The rhPDGF + CCM treated patients presented greater volume gain, higher soft tissue thickness, and a superior aesthetic score.

CONCLUSION

rhPDGF enhances the clinical, volumetric, and aesthetic outcomes of MAGRs above the results achieved with CAF + CCM alone (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04462237).

Effectiveness of surgical root coverage on dentin hypersensitivity: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To assess the effect of surgical root coverage (RC) on dentin hypersensitivity (DH) associated with gingival recession.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two independent reviewers conducted electronic literature searches in MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web Of Science, Dentistry & Oral Sciences Source, ScienceDirect, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases as well as a manual search to identify eligible clinical studies from January 2000 to March 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing two surgical RC techniques or a surgical RC technique with or without adjuvant were included. Meta-analyses were performed on data provided by RCTs.

RESULTS

Thirteen RCTs with a total of 701 patients (1086 recessions) were included. The percentage of DH suppression was 70.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] [64.4-76.6]; I²  = 39.2% [3.5-61.8], Q-test = 0.02) after surgical RC. Recession reduction and percentage of RC were both statistically significantly associated with DH suppression (estimate = 0.66 [0.10-1.23], p = .022, R²  = 14.45% and estimate = 0.04 [0.01-0.08], p = .012, R²  = 29.54%, respectively). Coronally advanced flap (CAF) + connective tissue graft showed results statistically more effective than CAF + xenogeneic collagen matrix in DH suppression (73.3% [65.6-79.8] and 61.4% [51.7-70.3], respectively; p = .048).

CONCLUSIONS

Success of surgical RC is associated with DH suppression.