Comparison of two types of xenogeneic matrices to treat single gingival recessions: A randomized clinical trial

dc.contributor.authorSantamaria, Mauro Pedrine [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorRossato, Amanda [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorMiguel, Manuela Maria Viana [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorFonseca, Manuela Bafini [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorBautista, Cristhian Reynaldo Gomez [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorde Marco, Andrea Carvalho [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorMathias-Santamaria, Ingrid Fernandes [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorFerreira Ferraz, Laís Fernanda [UNESP]
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of Kentucky
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of Maryland School of Dentistry
dc.date.accessioned2022-05-01T10:19:02Z
dc.date.available2022-05-01T10:19:02Z
dc.date.issued2021-01-01
dc.description.abstractBackground: Xenogeneic matrices (XMs) have been increasingly used for root coverage procedures. This study compared the use of two types of XM (collagen matrix [CM] and xenogeneic acellular dermal matrix [XDM]) associated with the coronally advanced flap technique (CAF) to treat single gingival recessions. Methods: Seventy-five patients presenting single RT1 gingival recession were treated by CAF (control group, n = 25), CAF+CM (test group 1, n = 25), or CAF+XDM (test group 2, n = 25) and completed 6-month follow-up. Clinical, patient-centered, and esthetic assessments were performed and intra- and intergroup differences were analyzed. Results: At 6 months, the mean recession reduction for CAF, CAF+CM, and CAF+XDM was 2.4 ± 0.8 mm, 2.4 ± 0.9 mm and 2.1 ± 0.8 mm, respectively (P > 0.05). The corresponding mean percentage of root coverage was 78.9% ± 26.2% for CAF, 78.0% ± 28.5% for CAF+CM, and 65.6% ± 26.9% for CAF+XDM (P > 0.05). Dentin hypersensitivity and esthetic conditions showed significantly improvements in all groups. Test groups presented significant gains in gingival thickness (GT; CAF+CM: 0.4 ± 0.3 mm; CAF+XDM: 0.4 ± 0.2 mm) compared to the control group (CAF: 0.0 ± 0.1 mm; P < 0.05). Conclusion: The CAF, CAF+CM, and CAF+XDM treatments each provided similar results in the treatment of single gingival recessions. The addition of either CM or XDM to CAF increases the GT.en
dc.description.affiliationDivision of Periodontics Institute of Science and Technology São José dos Campos São Paulo State University (Unesp)
dc.description.affiliationCollege of Dentistry–Lexington University of Kentucky
dc.description.affiliationDivision of Operative Dentistry Department of General Dentistry University of Maryland School of Dentistry
dc.description.affiliationUnespDivision of Periodontics Institute of Science and Technology São José dos Campos São Paulo State University (Unesp)
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1002/JPER.21-0212
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Periodontology.
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/JPER.21-0212
dc.identifier.issn0022-3492
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85119333374
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/233808
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Periodontology
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectconnective tissue graft(s)
dc.subjectcosmetic periodontal plastic surgery
dc.subjectgingival recession
dc.titleComparison of two types of xenogeneic matrices to treat single gingival recessions: A randomized clinical trialen
dc.typeArtigo
unesp.author.orcid0000-0001-9468-0729[1]

Arquivos