Comparison between connective tissue graft and xenogeneic acellular dermal matrix to treat single gingival recession: A data reanalysis of randomized clinical trials

Manuela Maria Viana Miguel, Laís Fernanda Ferreira Ferraz, Amanda Rossato, Tuana Mendonça Faria Cintra, Ingrid Fernandes Mathias-Santamaria, Mauro Pedrine Santamaria

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Objectives: There are few studies comparing xenogeneic acellular dermal matrixes (XDMs) with connective tissue graft (CTG) to treat single gingival recession (GR). The present study involved a reanalysis of previous studies and comparison of CTG or XDM to treat single RT1/GR. Materials and methods: Fifty patients from three previous randomized clinical trials treated either by CTG (n = 25) or XDM (n = 25) were evaluated after 6-month. Clinical, patient-centered, and esthetic parameters were assessed. Pearson's correlation and regression analyses were also performed. Results: Greater recession reduction (RecRed), percentage of root coverage (%RC), and complete root coverage (CRC) were observed in the CTG group (p ≤ 0.02). Gingival thickness (GT) and keratinized tissue width (KTW) gains were higher in the CTG group. The CTG group showed better esthetic at 6-month. Logistic analyses reported that GT([OR] = 1.6473) and papilla height (PH) (OR = 8.20) are predictors of CRC. GT*XDM interaction was a negative predictor of CRC (OR = 7.105−5). GT at baseline acted as a predictor of RecRed in both groups (p = 0.03). The XDM graft impacted RecRed and %RC negatively. Baseline PH was a predictor of %RC for both grafts. Conclusion: CTG was superior for treating RT1/GR, providing better root coverage outcomes and tissue gains over time. GT, PH, and graft type were classified as predictors of CRC. Clinical significance: CTG presented better outcomes to treat single RT1 gingival recession when compared to the XDM.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1156-1165
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry
Volume34
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2022

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
The authors do not have any financial interest in the companies whose materials are included in this article. The authors appreciate the financial support provided by Research Funding Agency from São Paulo State (FAPESP), Brazil, grants # 2014/00119–0; 2012/14595–3; 2018/03284–3; 2021/00588–4. In addition, this study was financed in part by the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES), Brazil—Finance Code 001. Dr Mauro Santamaria is supported by the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development from Brazil, CNPq (grant # 304269/2019–0).

Funding Information:
Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico, Grant/Award Number: 304269/2019–0; Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior, Grant/Award Number: Finance Code 001; Fundação de Amparoà Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo, Grant/Award Numbers: 2014/00119–0, 2012/14595–3, 2018/03284–3, 2021/00588–4 Funding information

Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.

Keywords

  • connective tissue graft(s)
  • dental
  • esthetics
  • gingival recession
  • heterografts
  • mucogingival surgery

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dentistry (all)

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison between connective tissue graft and xenogeneic acellular dermal matrix to treat single gingival recession: A data reanalysis of randomized clinical trials'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this