Eduardo Montero1, Ana Molina1, Paula Matesanz1, Alberto Monje2,3, Ignacio Sanz-Sánchez1, David Herrera1. 1. ETEP (Etiology and Therapy of Periodontal and Peri-implant Diseases), Research Group, University Complutense of Madrid, Madrid, Spain. 2. Department of Periodontology, Universidad Internacional de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain. 3. Department of Periodontics and Oral Medicine, School of Dentistry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the efficacy of soft tissue substitutes compared to autogenous gingival grafts in surgical procedures aimed at increasing the width of keratinized mucosa (KM) around dental implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two focused questions were developed: PICOS #1) "What is the efficacy of surgical procedures using soft tissue substitutes, as compared to autogenous grafts, to increase the amount of peri-implant keratinized mucosa, in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs)?"; and PICOS #2) "What is the effectiveness of soft tissue substitutes to increase the amount of peri-implant keratinized mucosa, in RCTs, CCTs, cohort studies or case series?". Besides KM augmentation, other relevant outcomes such as clinical and radiographic peri-implant outcomes, incidence of biological complications, surgical time, or patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were collected. Meta-analyses were performed whenever possible. RESULTS: Ten publications and an unpublished study were included. KM augmentation was significantly greater for autogenous grafts (n = 6; weighted mean difference (WMD) = -0.9 mm; 95% confidence interval (CI) [-1.4; -0.3]; p = .001). However, no significant differences between autogenous grafts and soft tissue substitutes were observed when exclusively xenografts were considered (n = 5; WMD=-0.8 mm; 95% CI [-1.6; 0.0]; p = .062). Surgical time and postsurgical pain seemed to be reduced by the use of soft tissue substitutes. CONCLUSIONS: Free gingival grafts (FGG) are more effective in the augmentation of KM mucosa around dental implants than soft tissue substitutes. However, substitutes of xenogeneic origin may be an alternative to autogenous tissues.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the efficacy of soft tissue substitutes compared to autogenous gingival grafts in surgical procedures aimed at increasing the width of keratinized mucosa (KM) around dental implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two focused questions were developed: PICOS #1) "What is the efficacy of surgical procedures using soft tissue substitutes, as compared to autogenous grafts, to increase the amount of peri-implant keratinized mucosa, in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs)?"; and PICOS #2) "What is the effectiveness of soft tissue substitutes to increase the amount of peri-implant keratinized mucosa, in RCTs, CCTs, cohort studies or case series?". Besides KM augmentation, other relevant outcomes such as clinical and radiographic peri-implant outcomes, incidence of biological complications, surgical time, or patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were collected. Meta-analyses were performed whenever possible. RESULTS: Ten publications and an unpublished study were included. KM augmentation was significantly greater for autogenous grafts (n = 6; weighted mean difference (WMD) = -0.9 mm; 95% confidence interval (CI) [-1.4; -0.3]; p = .001). However, no significant differences between autogenous grafts and soft tissue substitutes were observed when exclusively xenografts were considered (n = 5; WMD=-0.8 mm; 95% CI [-1.6; 0.0]; p = .062). Surgical time and postsurgical pain seemed to be reduced by the use of soft tissue substitutes. CONCLUSIONS: Free gingival grafts (FGG) are more effective in the augmentation of KM mucosa around dental implants than soft tissue substitutes. However, substitutes of xenogeneic origin may be an alternative to autogenous tissues.