Harvest graft substitute for soft tissue volume augmentation around existing implants: A randomized, controlled and blinded multicenter trial

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Donald S. Clem, Pamela K. McClain, Michael K. McGuire, Chris R. Richardson, Greg A. Santarelli, Rachel A. Schallhorn, E. Todd Scheyer, John C. Gunsolley, Thiago Morelli
{"title":"Harvest graft substitute for soft tissue volume augmentation around existing implants: A randomized, controlled and blinded multicenter trial","authors":"Donald S. Clem,&nbsp;Pamela K. McClain,&nbsp;Michael K. McGuire,&nbsp;Chris R. Richardson,&nbsp;Greg A. Santarelli,&nbsp;Rachel A. Schallhorn,&nbsp;E. Todd Scheyer,&nbsp;John C. Gunsolley,&nbsp;Thiago Morelli","doi":"10.1002/JPER.23-0305","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Using a single-blind, randomized, controlled, multicenter, practice-based clinical trial, a volume-stable collagen matrix (VCMX) was compared with connective tissue graft (CTG) for soft tissue augmentation around existing dental implants.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Sixty patients (31 VCMX and 31 CTG) were included. The primary outcome was a soft tissue thickness change 3 mm below the gingival margin (GM). Secondary outcomes included clinical measures, such as keratinized tissue widths (KTw), probing pocket depths, and pink esthetic scores, and patient-reported outcomes (PRO).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>There were no significant differences between test and control patient demographics or clinical measures throughout the 1-year study. VCMX “grafts” were by design larger than CTG, and surgery time was less (27% less, <i>p</i> = 0.0005). Three millimeters below the GM (primary endpoint), tissue thickness increase was noninferior for VCMX compared with CTG (0.93 ± 0.80 mm vs. 1.10 ± 0.51 mm, respectively), inferior (by 0.25 mm) at 1 mm, and noninferior at 5 mm. Postoperative pain was significantly less for VCMX patients (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.0001), but all other PRO measures, including esthetics and satisfaction, improved similarly for both therapies.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Given the inclusion criteria for this study, namely soft tissue augmentation around existing implants with some evidence of KTw and minimal recession, VCMX provided soft tissue thickness and volume increases similar (noninferior) to CTG. Clinical measures and PRO were similar between therapies—site sensitivity and esthetics improved similarly for both therapies—but surgery time and pain following surgery were significantly less for VCMX.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":16716,"journal":{"name":"Journal of periodontology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of periodontology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/JPER.23-0305","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Using a single-blind, randomized, controlled, multicenter, practice-based clinical trial, a volume-stable collagen matrix (VCMX) was compared with connective tissue graft (CTG) for soft tissue augmentation around existing dental implants.

Methods

Sixty patients (31 VCMX and 31 CTG) were included. The primary outcome was a soft tissue thickness change 3 mm below the gingival margin (GM). Secondary outcomes included clinical measures, such as keratinized tissue widths (KTw), probing pocket depths, and pink esthetic scores, and patient-reported outcomes (PRO).

Results

There were no significant differences between test and control patient demographics or clinical measures throughout the 1-year study. VCMX “grafts” were by design larger than CTG, and surgery time was less (27% less, p = 0.0005). Three millimeters below the GM (primary endpoint), tissue thickness increase was noninferior for VCMX compared with CTG (0.93 ± 0.80 mm vs. 1.10 ± 0.51 mm, respectively), inferior (by 0.25 mm) at 1 mm, and noninferior at 5 mm. Postoperative pain was significantly less for VCMX patients (p < 0.0001), but all other PRO measures, including esthetics and satisfaction, improved similarly for both therapies.

Conclusions

Given the inclusion criteria for this study, namely soft tissue augmentation around existing implants with some evidence of KTw and minimal recession, VCMX provided soft tissue thickness and volume increases similar (noninferior) to CTG. Clinical measures and PRO were similar between therapies—site sensitivity and esthetics improved similarly for both therapies—but surgery time and pain following surgery were significantly less for VCMX.

用于现有种植体周围软组织体积增大的收获移植替代物:随机、对照和盲法多中心试验
通过一项单盲、随机、对照、多中心、基于实践的临床试验,比较了体积稳定胶原基质(VCMX)和结缔组织移植(CTG)在现有牙科种植体周围软组织增量方面的效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of periodontology
Journal of periodontology 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
9.10
自引率
7.00%
发文量
290
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Periodontology publishes articles relevant to the science and practice of periodontics and related areas.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信