Cargando…

Acellular dermal matrix and subepithelial connective tissue grafts for root coverage: A systematic review

BACKGROUND: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate whether patients with gingival recession would benefit from an acellular dermal matrix graft (ADMG) in ways that are comparable to the gold standard of the subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gallagher, Sarah Ivy, Matthews, Debora Candace
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5846239/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29551861
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jisp.jisp_222_17
_version_ 1783305548971638784
author Gallagher, Sarah Ivy
Matthews, Debora Candace
author_facet Gallagher, Sarah Ivy
Matthews, Debora Candace
author_sort Gallagher, Sarah Ivy
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate whether patients with gingival recession would benefit from an acellular dermal matrix graft (ADMG) in ways that are comparable to the gold standard of the subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing ADMG to SCTG for the treatment of Miller Class I and II recession defects was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched up to March 2016 for controlled trials with minimum 6 months duration. The primary outcome was root coverage; secondary outcomes included attachment level change, keratinized tissue (KT) change, and patient-based outcomes. Both authors independently assessed the quality of each included trial and extracted the relevant data. RESULTS: From 158 potential titles, 17 controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. There were no differences between ADMG and SCTG for mean root coverage, percent root coverage, and clinical attachment level gain. ADMG was statistically better than SCTG for gain in width of KT (−0.43 mm; 95% confidence interval: −0.72, −0.15). Only one study compared patient-based outcomes. CONCLUSION: This review found that an ADMG would be a suitable root coverage substitute for an SCTG when avoidance of the second surgical site is preferred.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5846239
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58462392018-03-16 Acellular dermal matrix and subepithelial connective tissue grafts for root coverage: A systematic review Gallagher, Sarah Ivy Matthews, Debora Candace J Indian Soc Periodontol Original Article BACKGROUND: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate whether patients with gingival recession would benefit from an acellular dermal matrix graft (ADMG) in ways that are comparable to the gold standard of the subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing ADMG to SCTG for the treatment of Miller Class I and II recession defects was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched up to March 2016 for controlled trials with minimum 6 months duration. The primary outcome was root coverage; secondary outcomes included attachment level change, keratinized tissue (KT) change, and patient-based outcomes. Both authors independently assessed the quality of each included trial and extracted the relevant data. RESULTS: From 158 potential titles, 17 controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. There were no differences between ADMG and SCTG for mean root coverage, percent root coverage, and clinical attachment level gain. ADMG was statistically better than SCTG for gain in width of KT (−0.43 mm; 95% confidence interval: −0.72, −0.15). Only one study compared patient-based outcomes. CONCLUSION: This review found that an ADMG would be a suitable root coverage substitute for an SCTG when avoidance of the second surgical site is preferred. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5846239/ /pubmed/29551861 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jisp.jisp_222_17 Text en Copyright: © 2018 Indian Society of Periodontology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Gallagher, Sarah Ivy
Matthews, Debora Candace
Acellular dermal matrix and subepithelial connective tissue grafts for root coverage: A systematic review
title Acellular dermal matrix and subepithelial connective tissue grafts for root coverage: A systematic review
title_full Acellular dermal matrix and subepithelial connective tissue grafts for root coverage: A systematic review
title_fullStr Acellular dermal matrix and subepithelial connective tissue grafts for root coverage: A systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Acellular dermal matrix and subepithelial connective tissue grafts for root coverage: A systematic review
title_short Acellular dermal matrix and subepithelial connective tissue grafts for root coverage: A systematic review
title_sort acellular dermal matrix and subepithelial connective tissue grafts for root coverage: a systematic review
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5846239/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29551861
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jisp.jisp_222_17
work_keys_str_mv AT gallaghersarahivy acellulardermalmatrixandsubepithelialconnectivetissuegraftsforrootcoverageasystematicreview
AT matthewsdeboracandace acellulardermalmatrixandsubepithelialconnectivetissuegraftsforrootcoverageasystematicreview