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...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
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 |