Xenogeneic collagen matrix versus free gingival graft for augmenting keratinized mucosa around posterior mandibular implants: a randomized clinical trial

Qiu, Xiaohai; Li, Xuejing; Li, Fengzhou; Hu, Dandan; Wen, Zhuo; Wang, Yanying; Zhang, Jian

doi:10.1007/s00784-022-04853-8

Cited by 14 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…), 10 studies were eligible for full‐text review (Fu et al 2021 , Huang et al 2021 , Lee, Kim, and Jang 2010 , Lim, An, and Lee 2018 , Oh et al 2017 , Preidl et al 2021 , Qiu et al 2023 , Schmitt et al 2016 , Vellis, Kutkut, and Al‐Sabbagh 2019 , Tarasenko et al 2020 ). Four studies (Fu et al 2021 , Oh et al 2017 , Preidl et al 2021 , Vellis, Kutkut, and Al‐Sabbagh 2019 ) were subsequently excluded and as a result six studies (Huang et al 2021 , Lee, Kim, and Jang 2010 , Lim, An, and Lee 2018 , Qiu et al 2023 , Schmitt et al 2016 , Tarasenko et al 2020 ) were included in the present review (Table 2 ). The main reason for exclusion was the timing of soft tissue augmentation, which was performed either before implant placement or during the maintenance phase.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The main reason for exclusion was the timing of soft tissue augmentation, which was performed either before implant placement or during the maintenance phase. Of the six included studies, two were conducted in China (Huang et al 2021 , Qiu et al 2023 ), two in Korea (Lee, Kim, and Jang 2010 , Lim, An, and Lee 2018 ), one in Germany (Schmitt et al 2016 ), and one in Russia (Tarasenko et al 2020 ). All the included studies, except one (Lim, An, and Lee 2018 ), were conducted in a university setting and all were parallel‐group studies.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Xenogeneic Collagen Matrix Versus Free Gingival Graft for Augmenting Peri‐Implant Keratinized Mucosa Around Dental Implants: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Atieh,

Shah,

Hakam

et al. 2024

Clinical & Exp Dental Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThere is a growing evidence to suggest augmenting peri‐implant keratinized mucosa in the presence of ≤ 2 mm of keratinized mucosa. However, the most appropriate surgical technique and augmentation materials have yet to be defined. The aim of this systematic review and meta‐analyses was to evaluate the clinical and patient‐reported outcomes of augmenting keratinized mucosa around implants using free gingival graft (FGG) versus xenogeneic collagen matrix (XCM) before commencing prosthetic implant treatment.Material and MethodsElectronic databases were searched to identify observational studies comparing implant sites augmented with FGG to those augmented with XCM. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias tool.ResultsSix studies with 174 participants were included in the present review. Of these, 87 participants had FGG, whereas the remaining participants had XCM. At 6 months, sites augmented with FGG were associated with less changes in the gained width of peri‐implant keratinized mucosa compared to those augmented with XCM (mean difference 1.06; 95% confidence interval −0.01 to 2.13; p = 0.05). The difference, however, was marginally significant. The difference between the two groups in changes in thickness of peri‐implant keratinized mucosa at 6 months was statistically significantly in favor of FGG. On the other hand, XCM had significantly shorter surgical time, lower postoperative pain score, and higher color match compared to FGG.ConclusionsWithin the limitation of this review, the augmentation of keratinized mucosa using FGG before the placement of the final prosthesis may have short‐term positive effects on soft tissue thickness. XCM might be considered in aesthetically demanding implant sites and where patient comfort or shorter surgical time is a priority. The evidence support, however, is of low to moderate certainty; therefore, further studies are needed to support the findings of the present review.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Xenogeneic Collagen Matrix Versus Free Gingival Graft for Augmenting Peri‐Implant Keratinized Mucosa Around Dental Implants: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Atieh,

Shah,

Hakam

et al. 2024

Clinical & Exp Dental Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, a previous systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the influence of the width of keratinized mucosa on soft and hard tissue outcomes concluded that the lack of keratinized mucosa negatively affected the prevalence of peri-implant pathology, plaque accumulation, soft tissue inflammation, mucosal recession, and marginal bone loss [ 40 ], which could impact implant survival and success at least indirectly. Despite the lack of long-term studies, new techniques for keratinized mucosa width augmentation have been described in the recent literature, including a xenogeneic collagen matrix, keratinized mucosa shiftings, or mesh-free gingival grafts [ 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 ]. A long-term clinical prospective study on 13 patients investigating the efficacy of the xenografic porcine collagen matrix in the augmentation of keratinized mucosa revealed stable results in maintaining a width of >2 mm at 10 years of follow-up [ 41 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Partial Implant Rehabilitations in the Posterior Regions of the Jaws Supported by Short Dental Implants (7.0 mm): A 7-Year Clinical and 5-Year Radiographical Prospective Study

de Araújo Nobre,

Antunes,

Lopes

et al. 2024

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Short implants have been used in the restoration of edentulous jaws in the past several years. However, some studies have suggested that short implants are less successful than standard implants. The aim of this study is to investigate the outcome of short implants placed in the posterior maxilla or mandible following one-stage or immediate-function protocols with a follow-up of 7 years (clinically) and 5 years (radiographically). Methods: This study included 127 patients rehabilitated with 217 implants measuring 7 mm and supporting 157 fixed prostheses in the posterior segments of both jaws. Final abutments were delivered at the surgery stage and were loaded after 4 months in 116 patients (199 implants). The primary outcome measure was implant survival measured through life tables. Secondary outcome measures were marginal bone loss and the incidence of biological and mechanical complications at the patient level and implant level (evaluated through descriptive statistics). Results: Twenty-four patients (18.9%) with 45 implants (20.7%) were lost to the follow-up. In total, 32 implants failed (14.8%) in 22 patients (17.3%), resulting in a cumulative survival rate at 7 years of 81.2% for 7 mm implants in the rehabilitation of the posterior regions of the maxilla and mandible. The average (standard deviation) marginal bone loss was 1.47 mm (0.99 mm) at 5 years. The incidence rate of biological complications was 12.6% and 10.6% at the patient and implant levels, respectively. The incidence rate of mechanical complications was 21.3% for patients and 16.1% for implants. A higher failure rate was registered in smokers and in implant arrangements with a sequence of three fixtures in proximity. Conclusions: Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that the placement of 7 mm long implants for the partial implant-supported rehabilitation of atrophic posterior jaws is possible in the long term, judging by the survival rate and stable average marginal bone loss. Nevertheless, strict case selection should be performed, especially in smokers and with implant arrangements that provide a minimum of one unit in inter-implant distance.

show abstract

“…For the former, XCM showed varied treatment results [ 23 24 25 26 27 ]. Notably, in the posterior mandible, the effect of XCM did not appear to be equivalent to that of autogenous tissue [ 28 ]. For root coverage procedures, the outcomes appeared more promising; however, the increase in gingival thickness was statistically significantly lower in an XCM-treated group compared to an SCTG group [ 29 30 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of polydeoxyribonucleotide with xenogeneic collagen matrix on gingival phenotype modification: a pilot preclinical study

Lim

Kim

Lee

et al. 2023

J Periodontal Implant Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To investigate the effect of xenogeneic collagen matrix (XCM) with polydeoxyribonucleotide (PDRN) for gingival phenotype modification compared to autogenous connective tissue graft. Methods Five mongrel dogs were used in this study. Box-type gingival defects were surgically created bilaterally on the maxillary canines 8 weeks before gingival augmentation. A coronally positioned flap was performed with either a subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) or XCM with PDRN (2.0 mg/mL). The animals were sacrificed after 12 weeks. Intraoral scanning was performed for soft tissue analysis, and histologic and histomorphometric analyses were performed. Results One animal exhibited wound dehiscence, leaving 4 for analysis. Superimposition of STL files revealed no significant difference in the amount of gingival thickness increase (ranging from 0.69±0.25 mm to 0.80±0.31 mm in group SCTG and from 0.48±0.25 mm to 0.85±0.44 mm in group PDRN; P >0.05). Histomorphometric analysis showed no significant differences between the groups in supracrestal gingival tissue height, keratinized tissue height, tissue thickness, and rete peg density ( P >0.05). Conclusions XCM soaked with PDRN yielded comparable gingival augmentation to SCTG.

show abstract

Xenogeneic collagen matrix versus free gingival graft for augmenting keratinized mucosa around posterior mandibular implants: a randomized clinical trial

Cited by 14 publications

References 43 publications

Xenogeneic Collagen Matrix Versus Free Gingival Graft for Augmenting Peri‐Implant Keratinized Mucosa Around Dental Implants: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Xenogeneic Collagen Matrix Versus Free Gingival Graft for Augmenting Peri‐Implant Keratinized Mucosa Around Dental Implants: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Partial Implant Rehabilitations in the Posterior Regions of the Jaws Supported by Short Dental Implants (7.0 mm): A 7-Year Clinical and 5-Year Radiographical Prospective Study

Effect of polydeoxyribonucleotide with xenogeneic collagen matrix on gingival phenotype modification: a pilot preclinical study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About