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...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
2017-01-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.jisponline.com/article.asp?issn=0972-124X;year=2017;volume=21;issue=6;spage=439;epage=448;aulast=Gallagher |
| _version_ | 1811282847205425152 |
|---|---|
| author | Sarah Ivy Gallagher Debora Candace Matthews |
| author_facet | Sarah Ivy Gallagher Debora Candace Matthews |
| author_sort | Sarah Ivy Gallagher |
| collection | DOAJ |
| 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. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-13T01:59:54Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-dfe1a3cd5ff2456aa4220f550f53c6f9 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 0972-124X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-13T01:59:54Z |
| publishDate | 2017-01-01 |
| publisher | Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology |
| spelling | doaj.art-dfe1a3cd5ff2456aa4220f550f53c6f92022-12-22T03:07:39ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsJournal of Indian Society of Periodontology0972-124X2017-01-0121643944810.4103/jisp.jisp_222_17Acellular dermal matrix and subepithelial connective tissue grafts for root coverage: A systematic reviewSarah Ivy GallagherDebora Candace MatthewsBackground: 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.http://www.jisponline.com/article.asp?issn=0972-124X;year=2017;volume=21;issue=6;spage=439;epage=448;aulast=GallagherAcellular dermisconnective tissuegingival recessionmeta-analysissystematic review |
| spellingShingle | Sarah Ivy Gallagher Debora Candace Matthews Acellular dermal matrix and subepithelial connective tissue grafts for root coverage: A systematic review Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology Acellular dermis connective tissue gingival recession meta-analysis 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 | Acellular dermis connective tissue gingival recession meta-analysis systematic review |
| url | http://www.jisponline.com/article.asp?issn=0972-124X;year=2017;volume=21;issue=6;spage=439;epage=448;aulast=Gallagher |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT sarahivygallagher acellulardermalmatrixandsubepithelialconnectivetissuegraftsforrootcoverageasystematicreview AT deboracandacematthews acellulardermalmatrixandsubepithelialconnectivetissuegraftsforrootcoverageasystematicreview |