Efficacy of a harvest graft substitute for recession coverage and soft tissue volume augmentation: A randomized controlled trial
dc.contributor.author | McGuire, Michael K. | |
dc.contributor.author | Janakievski, Jim | |
dc.contributor.author | Scheyer, E. Todd | |
dc.contributor.author | Velásquez, Diego | |
dc.contributor.author | Gunsolley, John C. | |
dc.contributor.author | Heard, Rick H. | |
dc.contributor.author | Morelli, Thiago | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-04-08T18:08:15Z | |
dc.date.available | 2023-04-08 14:08:14 | en |
dc.date.available | 2022-04-08T18:08:15Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2022-03 | |
dc.identifier.citation | McGuire, Michael K.; Janakievski, Jim; Scheyer, E. Todd; Velásquez, Diego ; Gunsolley, John C.; Heard, Rick H.; Morelli, Thiago (2022). "Efficacy of a harvest graft substitute for recession coverage and soft tissue volume augmentation: A randomized controlled trial." Journal of Periodontology 93(3): 333-342. | |
dc.identifier.issn | 0022-3492 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1943-3670 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/172096 | |
dc.description.abstract | BackgroundThe autogenous connective tissue graft (CTG) with coronally advanced flap (CTG+CAF) is the "gold standard" for recession defect coverage; however, researchers continue to pursue lower morbidity, more convenient and unlimited supply harvest graft substitutes, including those that could provide soft tissue volume augmentation.MethodsA randomized, controlled, double‐masked comparison of a volume‐stable collagen matrix (VCMX) versus CTG was conducted at four clinical investigation sites. Single, contralateral, within patient matched‐pair, RT1 recession defects were treated with VCMX+CAF (test) and CTG+CAF (control). The primary efficacy end point was percent root coverage at 6 months. Secondary efficacy end points included clinical measures such as soft tissue volume, attachment level, and keratinized tissue width. Patient‐reported outcomes included measures such as discomfort, esthetics, and overall satisfaction; 6‐month end point results were followed for 1 year.ResultsThirty patients received control and test therapies, and all patients were available for follow‐up measures. Average percent root coverage for CTG+CAF was 90.5% ± 14.87% versus 70.7% ± 28.26% for VCMX+CAF, P <0.0001. Both therapies produced significant soft tissue volume increases (84.8 ± 47.43 mm3 control versus 48.90 ± 35.58 mm3 test, P = 0.0006). The test, harvest graft substitute produced less postoperative pain and was preferred by patients at the 6‐month end point. All other end point measures were not significantly different.ConclusionsVCMX+CAF root coverage was inferior to CTG+CAF but produced less morbidity and was preferred by patients. Case/patient selection and surgical technique appear key to achieving successful results with the harvest graft alternative. | |
dc.publisher | Wiley Periodicals, Inc. | |
dc.subject.other | collagen; connective tissue; esthetics | |
dc.subject.other | dental; gingival recession; personal satisfaction | |
dc.title | Efficacy of a harvest graft substitute for recession coverage and soft tissue volume augmentation: A randomized controlled trial | |
dc.type | Article | |
dc.rights.robots | IndexNoFollow | |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Dentistry | |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Health Sciences | |
dc.description.peerreviewed | Peer Reviewed | |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/172096/1/jper10834_am.pdf | |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/172096/2/jper10834.pdf | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1002/JPER.21-0131 | |
dc.identifier.source | Journal of Periodontology | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | McGuire MK, Scheyer ET. Long‐term results comparing xenogeneic collagen matrix and autogenous connective tissue grafts with coronally advanced flaps for treatment of dehiscence‐type recession defects. J Periodontal. 2016; 87: 221 ‐ 227. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Kokich VO Jr, Kiyak HA, Shapiro PA. Comparing the perception of dentists and lay people to altered dental esthetics. J. Esthet. Dent. 1999; 11: 311 ‐ 324. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Chambrone L, Armitage GC. Commentary: statistical significance versus clinical relevance in periodontal research: implications for clinical practice. J. Periodontol. 2016; 87: 613 ‐ 616. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Chambrone L, Tatakis DN. Periodontal soft tissue coverage procedures: a systemic review from AAP regeneration workshop. J Periodontal. 2015; 86 (Suppl): S8 ‐ S51. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Buti J, Baccini M, Nieri M, La Marca M, Pini‐Prato GP. Bayesian network meta‐analysis of root coverage procedures: ranking efficacy and identification of best treatment. J. Clin. Periodontol. 2013; 40: 372 ‐ 386. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Mathes SH, Wohlwend L, Uebersax L, et al. A bioreactor test system to mimic the biological and mechanical environment of oral soft tissues and to evaluate substitutes for connective tissue grafts. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2010; 107: 1029 ‐ 1039. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Thoma DS, Villar CC, Cochran DL, Hämmerle CH, Jung RE. Tissue integration of collagen‐based matrices: an experimental study in mice. Clin. Oral. Implants Res. 2012; 23: 1333 ‐ 1339. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Ferrantino L, Bosshardt D, Nevins M, Simion M. Tissue integration of a volume‐stable collagen matrix in an experimental soft tissue augmentation model. Int. J. Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2016; 36: 807 ‐ 816. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Thoma DS, Zeltner M, Hilbe M, Hämmerle CH, Hüsler J, Jung RE. Randomized controlled clinical study evaluating effectiveness and safety of a volume‐stable collagen matrix compared to autogenous connective tissue grafts for soft tissue augmentation at implant sites. J. Clin. Periodontol. 2016; 43: 874 ‐ 885. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Morelli T, Zhang S, Monaghan E, Moss KL, Lopez B, Marchesan J. Three‐dimensional volumetric changes after socket augmentation with deproteinized bovine bone and collagen matrix. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants. 2020; 35: 566 ‐ 575. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Wilson TG, McGuire MK, Nunn ME. Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of periodontal applications of a living tissue‐engineered human fibroblast‐ derived dermal substitute. ii. comparison to the subepithelial connective tissue graft: a randomized controlled feasibility study. J Periodontal. 2005; 76: 881 ‐ 889. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | McGuire MK, Scheyer ET, Nunn ME, Lavin PT. A pilot study to evaluate a tissue‐engineered bilayered cell therapy as an alternative to tissue from the palate. J Periodontal. 2008; 79: 1847 ‐ 1856. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | McGuire MK, Scheyer ET, Nunn M. Evaluation of human recession defects treated with coronally advanced flaps and either enamel matrix derivative or connective tissue: comparison of clinical parameters at 10 years. J. Periodontol. 2012; 83: 1353 ‐ 1362. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | McGuire MK, Scheyer ET, Snyder MB. Evaluation of recession defects treated with coronally advanced flaps and either recombinant human platelet‐derived growth factor‐BB plus Œ≤‐Tricalcium phosphate or connective tissue: comparison of clinical parameters at 5 years. J Periodontal. 2014; 85: 1361 ‐ 1370. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | McGuire MK, Scheyer ET. Xenogeneic collagen matrix with coronally advanced flap compared to connective tissue with coronally advanced flap for the treatment of dehiscence‐type recession defects. J Periodontal. 2010; 81: 1108 ‐ 1117. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Goodson JM. Clinical measurements of periodontitis. J. Clin. Periodontol. 1986; 13: 446 ‐ 460. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Stefanini M, Mounssif I, Barootchi S, et al. An exploratory clinical study evaluating safety and performance of a volume‐stable collagen matrix with coronally advanced flap for single gingival recession treatment. Clin Oral Invest. 2020; 24: 3181 ‐ 3191. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Thoma DS, Buranawat B, Hämmerle CH, Held U, Jung RE. Efficacy of soft tissue augmentation around dental implants and in partially edentulous areas: a systematic review. J. Clin. Periodontol. 2014; 41 (Suppl 15 ): S77 ‐ 91. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Gargallo‐Albiol J, Barootchi S, Tavelli L, Wang HL. Efficacy of xenogeneic collagen matrix to augment peri‐implant soft tissue thickness compared to autogenous connective tissue graft: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants. 2019; 34: 1059 ‐ 1069. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Zucchelli G, Tavelli L, Barootchi S, Stefanini M, Wang HL, Cortellini P. Clinical remarks on the significance of tooth malposition and papillae dimension on the prediction of root coverage. Int. J. Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2020; 40: 795 ‐ 803. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Grøvle L, Ei H, & Haugen A J. ( 2020 ). Rescue and concomitant analgesics in placebo‐controlled trials of pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pain and low back pain. Pain, 161: 3 ‐ 10. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Katz, N. ( 2005 ). Methodological issues in clinical trials of opioids for chronic pain. Neurology, 65: S32 ‐ S49. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Schulze‐Späte, U., & Lee, C. T. ( 2019 ). modified vestibular incision subperiosteal tunnel access procedure with volume‐stable collagen matrix for root coverage: report of three cases. Int. J. Periodontics Restorative Dent., 39: e181 ‐ e187. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Sculean, A., Nikolidakis, D., Nikou, G., Ivanovic, A., Chapple, I. L., & Stavropoulos, A. ( 2015 ). Biomaterials for promoting periodontal regeneration in human intrabony defects: a systematic review. Periodontology 2000, 68: 182 ‐ 216. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Aeppli DM, Boen JR, Bandt CL. Measuring and interpreting increases in probing depth and attachment loss. J. Periodontol. 1985; 56: 262 ‐ 264. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Badersten A, Nilvéus R, Egelberg J. Reproducibility of probing attachment level measurements. J. Clin. Periodontol. 1984; 11: 475 ‐ 485. | |
dc.working.doi | NO | en |
dc.owningcollname | Interdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed |
Files in this item
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.