Treatment of multiple gingival recessions with xenogeneic acellular dermal matrix compared to connective tissue graft: a randomized split-mouth clinical trial.
Acellular dermis
Connective tissue
Gingival recession
Oral surgical procedures
Journal
Journal of periodontal & implant science
ISSN: 2093-2278
Titre abrégé: J Periodontal Implant Sci
Pays: Korea (South)
ID NLM: 101526931
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2021
Apr 2021
Historique:
received:
15
04
2020
revised:
10
08
2020
accepted:
03
09
2020
entrez:
29
4
2021
pubmed:
30
4
2021
medline:
30
4
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of the tunnel technique for root coverage using a new xenogeneic acellular dermal matrix vs. connective tissue grafting (CTG) for the treatment of multiple maxillary adjacent recessions (recession type 1) at 12 months postoperatively. This study enrolled 12 patients with at least 3 contiguous, bilateral, symmetrical maxillary gingival recessions (i.e., at least 6 recessions per patient). In total, 74 recessions were treated using the modified coronally advanced tunnel (MCAT) technique combined with a novel porcine-derived acellular dermal matrix (PADM) at 37 test sites or CTG at 37 control sites. The following clinical parameters were measured: recession height, clinical attachment level, width of keratinized tissue, probing depth, recession width, gingival thickness, mean root coverage (MRC), and complete root coverage (CRC). Comparisons between test and control groups were made for pain visual analog scale scores at 14 days. At 12 months, the MCAT with PADM (test) yielded a statistically significant improvement in all clinical parameters studied. MRC was significantly higher on the control sides (80.6%±23.7%) than on the test sides (68.8%±23.4%). Similarly, CRC was 48.7%±6.8% on the control sides (CTG), in contrast to 24.3%±8.2% on the test sides (PADM). Statistically significant differences were observed in favor of the control sides for all clinical parameters studied. Nevertheless, the MCAT in adjunction with PADM was clearly superior at reducing mean and maximum patient-reported postoperative pain intensity and pain duration in the first week after surgery. The use of PADM to treat multiple recessions improved clinical parameters at 12 months, but these outcomes were nevertheless poorer than those observed for CTG. However, PADM reduced morbidity, particularly the pain experienced by patients. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03162016.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33913631
pii: 51.77
doi: 10.5051/jpis.2002400120
pmc: PMC8090794
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03162016']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
77-87Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021. Korean Academy of Periodontology.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.
Références
Quintessence Int. 2016;47(9):739-47
pubmed: 27446998
J Clin Periodontol. 2017 Feb;44(2):185-194
pubmed: 27716970
J Clin Periodontol. 2011 Jul;38(7):661-6
pubmed: 21507033
J Clin Periodontol. 2014 Apr;41 Suppl 15:S123-42
pubmed: 24640997
J Clin Periodontol. 2019 Sep;46(9):937-948
pubmed: 31242333
J Clin Periodontol. 2018 Jan;45(1):78-88
pubmed: 29087001
J Biol Regul Homeost Agents. 2018 Jan-Feb;32(2 Suppl. 1):1-10
pubmed: 29460512
J Clin Periodontol. 2019 Jan;46(1):86-95
pubmed: 30362599
J Clin Periodontol. 2017 Jul;44(7):769-776
pubmed: 28548210
J Clin Periodontol. 2010 Jan;37(1):88-97
pubmed: 19968743
Quintessence Int. 2012 Jul-Aug;43(7):545-54
pubmed: 22670249
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Oct 02;10:CD007161
pubmed: 30277568
J Periodontol. 2016 Dec;87(12):1436-1443
pubmed: 27424564
J Periodontol. 2020 Jan;91(1):9-16
pubmed: 31461778
J Clin Periodontol. 2016 Oct;43(10):874-85
pubmed: 27310522
J Periodontol. 2006 Dec;77(12):2070-9
pubmed: 17209793
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 1985;5(2):8-13
pubmed: 3858267
J Periodontol. 2019 Dec;90(12):1399-1422
pubmed: 31361330
J Periodontol. 2018 Jun;89 Suppl 1:S204-S213
pubmed: 29926948
J Periodontol. 2020 Jan;91(1):17-25
pubmed: 31475361
J Clin Periodontol. 2019 Oct;46(10):1013-1023
pubmed: 31292987
J Clin Periodontol. 2014 Apr;41 Suppl 15:S63-76
pubmed: 24641002
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2018 Mar;30(2):89-95
pubmed: 28901687
J Clin Periodontol. 2017 Apr;44(4):446-453
pubmed: 28107560
J Clin Exp Dent. 2017 Dec 1;9(12):e1439-e1445
pubmed: 29410760
J Periodontol. 2003 May;74(5):741-56
pubmed: 12816306
J Clin Periodontol. 2014 Jun;41(6):582-92
pubmed: 24117676
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 1999 Jun;19(3):279-87
pubmed: 10635174
Periodontol 2000. 2017 Oct;75(1):296-316
pubmed: 28758301