Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Soft tissue substitutes in non-root coverage procedures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Bertl, Kristina; Melchard, Maximilian; Pandis, Nikolaos; Müller-Kern, Michael; Stavropoulos, Andreas.
Afiliação
  • Bertl K; Department of Periodontology, Faculty of Odontology, University of Malmö, Carl Gustafs väg 34, 20506, Malmö, Sweden.
  • Melchard M; Division of Oral Surgery, School of Dentistry, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
  • Pandis N; Division of Oral Surgery, School of Dentistry, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
  • Müller-Kern M; Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Dental School/Medical Faculty, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
  • Stavropoulos A; Division of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, School of Dentistry, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Clin Oral Investig ; 21(2): 505-518, 2017 Mar.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28108833
OBJECTIVES: The present systematic review compared the effectiveness of soft tissue substitutes (STSs) and autogenous free gingival grafts (FGGs) in non-root-coverage procedures to increase keratinized tissue (KT) width around teeth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Included studies fulfilled the following main eligibility criteria: (a) preclinical in vivo or human controlled trials using FGG as control, (b) non-root-coverage procedures, and (c) assessment of KT width. Meta-analysis was performed on the gain in KT width (primary outcome variable) and several secondary variables. RESULTS: Eight human trials with short observation time evaluating five different STSs were identified. FGG yielded consistently significantly (p < 0.001) larger increase in KT width irrespective whether the comparison regarded an acellular matrix or a tissue-engineered STS. Further, FGG yielded consistently ≥2 mm KT width postoperatively, while use of STS did not, in the few studies reporting on this outcome. On the other hand, STSs resulted in significantly better aesthetic outcomes and received greater patient preference (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Based on relatively limited evidence, in non-root-coverage procedures, FGG (1) resulted consistently in significantly larger increase in KT width compared to STS and (2) yielded consistently ≥2 mm KT width postoperatively, while STSs did not. STSs yielded significantly better aesthetic outcomes, received greater patient preference, and appeared safe. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Larger and more predictable increase in KT width is achieved with FGG, but STSs may be considered when aesthetics is important. Clinical studies reporting relevant posttreatment outcomes, e.g., postop KT width ≥2 mm, on the long-term (>6 months) are warranted.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Tecido Conjuntivo / Estética Dentária / Gengiva / Retração Gengival / Gengivoplastia Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Clin Oral Investig Assunto da revista: ODONTOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Suécia

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Tecido Conjuntivo / Estética Dentária / Gengiva / Retração Gengival / Gengivoplastia Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Clin Oral Investig Assunto da revista: ODONTOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Suécia