Root coverage using a coronally advanced flap with or without acellular dermal matrix: a meta-analysis.
10.5051/jpis.2016.46.1.22
- Author:
Wei GUAN
1
;
Haiqing LIAO
;
Li GUO
;
Changning WANG
;
Zhengguo CAO
Author Information
1. Department of Periodontology, The State Key Laboratory Breeding Base of Basic Science of Stomatology (Hubei-MOST KLOS) & Key Laboratory for Oral Biomedical Engineering of Ministry of Education (KLOBME), School & Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China. caozhengguo@whu.edu.cn
- Publication Type:Meta-Analysis ; Randomized Controlled Trial ; Original Article
- Keywords:
Acellular Dermis;
Gingival recession;
Meta-analysis
- MeSH:
Acellular Dermis*;
Allografts;
Connective Tissue;
Gingival Recession;
Transplants
- From:Journal of Periodontal & Implant Science
2016;46(1):22-34
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: Gingival recession is a major esthetic concern and may lead to root sensitivity during periodontal treatment. Coronally advanced flaps (CAFs) with and without acellular dermal matrix (ADM) are widely used in root coverage procedures. The aim of this study was to analyze the efficacy of CAF in combination with ADM in the treatment of gingival recession. METHODS: PubMed, The Cochrane Library, and Embase were used to identify relevant articles. The articles were screened, data were extracted, and the quality of the studies was assessed by three reviewers with expertise in clinical practice, trials, statistics, and biomedical editing. The clinical endpoints of interest included changes in recession, probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), and keratinized tissue (KT). RESULTS: Ten randomized controlled trials were identified, including six studies that compared CAFs with ADM and CAFs using connective tissue grafting (CTG) and four studies that compared CAFs with or without ADM. No statistically significant differences were found between the use of ADM and CTG, whereas statistically significant differences were found between groups in which ADM and CAF were combined and groups that underwent CAF alone with regard to recession coverage, CAL, and KT. The combination of CAF with an ADM allograft achieved more favorable recession coverage and recovery of CAL and KT than CAF alone. CONCLUSIONS: The results from the ADM and CTG groups suggest that both procedures may be equally effective in clinical practice. Given the limitations of this study, further investigation is needed to clarify the effectiveness of ADM and CAF in clinical practice.
