The results demonstrate that leaving the periosteum in place decreases the resorption rate of the extraction socket. Furthermore, the treatment of the extraction socket with BioOss Collagen and a free gingival graft seems beneficial in limiting the resorption process after tooth extraction.

Both treatment modalities using the microsurgical flap procedure resulted in a high percentage of primary flap closure and maximum tissue preservation. In terms of PPD reduction and CAL gain, the combination with EMD application appeared to be superior to the microsurgical access flap alone.

Socket preservation techniques, used in the present experiment, were not able to entirely compensate for the alterations after tooth extraction. Yet, incorporation of BioOss Collagen seems to have the potential to limit but not avoid the post-operative contour shrinkage.

No abstract

AimTo evaluate the non‐inferiority of the adjunct of a xenogeneic collagen matrix (CMX) or connective tissue graft (CTG) to coronally advanced flaps (CAF) for coverage of multiple adjacent recessions and compare superiority in patient‐reported outcomes (PROM).Material and methodsOne hundred and eighty‐seven subjects (92 CMX) with 485 recessions in 14 centres were randomized and followed up for 6 months. Patients filled daily diaries for 15 days to monitor patient‐reported experience. The primary outcome was changed in position of the gingival margin. Multilevel analysis used centre, subject and tooth as levels and baseline parameters as covariates.ResultsAverage baseline recession was 2.5 ± 1.0 mm. The surgery was 15.7 min shorter (95%CI from 11.9 to 19.6, p < .0001) and perceived lighter (11.9 VAS units, 95%CI from 4.6 to 19.1, p = .0014) in CMX subjects. Time to recovery was 1.8 days shorter in CMX. Six‐month root coverage was 1.7 ± 1.1 mm for CMX and 2.1 ± 1.0 mm for CTG (difference of 0.44 mm, 95%CI from 0.25 to 0.63 mm). The upper limit of the confidence interval was over the non‐inferiority margin of 0.25 mm. Odds of complete root coverage were significantly higher for CTG (OR = 4.0, 95% CI 1.8–8.8).ConclusionReplacing CTG with CMX shortens time to recovery and decreases morbidity, but the tested generation of devices is probably inferior to autologous CTG in terms of root coverage. Significant variability in PROMs was observed among centres.