Cargando…

Comparison of two soft tissue substitutes for the treatment of gingival recession defects: an animal histological study

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare two different soft tissue replacement grafts in their ability to treat gingival recession defects and successfully integrate with the surrounding tissues. METHODOLOGY: Nine beagle dogs were included and followed up to 10 weeks. Sites for intervention were allo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Suárez-López Del Amo, Fernando, Rodriguez, Juan C., Asa'ad, Farah, Wang, Hom-Lay
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Faculdade De Odontologia De Bauru - USP 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6768116/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31596366
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0584
_version_ 1783455056359587840
author Suárez-López Del Amo, Fernando
Rodriguez, Juan C.
Asa'ad, Farah
Wang, Hom-Lay
author_facet Suárez-López Del Amo, Fernando
Rodriguez, Juan C.
Asa'ad, Farah
Wang, Hom-Lay
author_sort Suárez-López Del Amo, Fernando
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare two different soft tissue replacement grafts in their ability to treat gingival recession defects and successfully integrate with the surrounding tissues. METHODOLOGY: Nine beagle dogs were included and followed up to 10 weeks. Sites for intervention were allocated to one of the grafting materials investigated. Treatment consisted of coronally advanced flap combined with one of the two soft tissue substitutes on a previous surgically created defect. Materials employed were porcine-derived acellular dermal matrix (ADM) [Novomatrix(™) (Test)] and collagen-based matrix (CBM) [Mucograft(®) (Control)]. Animals were sacrificed at 2, 6, and 10 weeks postoperatively and compared using descriptive histology and histomorphometric outcomes. RESULTS: Macroscopic findings were similar between test and control groups at all intervals. After 10 weeks, both groups demonstrated successful incorporation of the grafting materials without signs of rejection and with comparable tissue integration. The histomorphometric data were similar between groups at 2 weeks; however, the test group provided greater root coverage and increase in tissue thickness than the control at 6- and 10-weeks post surgically. CONCLUSIONS: Both porcine-derived ADM and CBM revealed similar histological outcomes with successful integration and absence of adverse events. Test group provided superior outcomes regarding root coverage and increase in tissue thickness.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6768116
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Faculdade De Odontologia De Bauru - USP
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67681162019-12-04 Comparison of two soft tissue substitutes for the treatment of gingival recession defects: an animal histological study Suárez-López Del Amo, Fernando Rodriguez, Juan C. Asa'ad, Farah Wang, Hom-Lay J Appl Oral Sci Original Article OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare two different soft tissue replacement grafts in their ability to treat gingival recession defects and successfully integrate with the surrounding tissues. METHODOLOGY: Nine beagle dogs were included and followed up to 10 weeks. Sites for intervention were allocated to one of the grafting materials investigated. Treatment consisted of coronally advanced flap combined with one of the two soft tissue substitutes on a previous surgically created defect. Materials employed were porcine-derived acellular dermal matrix (ADM) [Novomatrix(™) (Test)] and collagen-based matrix (CBM) [Mucograft(®) (Control)]. Animals were sacrificed at 2, 6, and 10 weeks postoperatively and compared using descriptive histology and histomorphometric outcomes. RESULTS: Macroscopic findings were similar between test and control groups at all intervals. After 10 weeks, both groups demonstrated successful incorporation of the grafting materials without signs of rejection and with comparable tissue integration. The histomorphometric data were similar between groups at 2 weeks; however, the test group provided greater root coverage and increase in tissue thickness than the control at 6- and 10-weeks post surgically. CONCLUSIONS: Both porcine-derived ADM and CBM revealed similar histological outcomes with successful integration and absence of adverse events. Test group provided superior outcomes regarding root coverage and increase in tissue thickness. Faculdade De Odontologia De Bauru - USP 2019-10-07 /pmc/articles/PMC6768116/ /pubmed/31596366 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0584 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Suárez-López Del Amo, Fernando
Rodriguez, Juan C.
Asa'ad, Farah
Wang, Hom-Lay
Comparison of two soft tissue substitutes for the treatment of gingival recession defects: an animal histological study
title Comparison of two soft tissue substitutes for the treatment of gingival recession defects: an animal histological study
title_full Comparison of two soft tissue substitutes for the treatment of gingival recession defects: an animal histological study
title_fullStr Comparison of two soft tissue substitutes for the treatment of gingival recession defects: an animal histological study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of two soft tissue substitutes for the treatment of gingival recession defects: an animal histological study
title_short Comparison of two soft tissue substitutes for the treatment of gingival recession defects: an animal histological study
title_sort comparison of two soft tissue substitutes for the treatment of gingival recession defects: an animal histological study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6768116/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31596366
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0584
work_keys_str_mv AT suarezlopezdelamofernando comparisonoftwosofttissuesubstitutesforthetreatmentofgingivalrecessiondefectsananimalhistologicalstudy
AT rodriguezjuanc comparisonoftwosofttissuesubstitutesforthetreatmentofgingivalrecessiondefectsananimalhistologicalstudy
AT asaadfarah comparisonoftwosofttissuesubstitutesforthetreatmentofgingivalrecessiondefectsananimalhistologicalstudy
AT wanghomlay comparisonoftwosofttissuesubstitutesforthetreatmentofgingivalrecessiondefectsananimalhistologicalstudy