2007
DOI: 10.1902/jop.2007.060356
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of Two Surgical Procedures for Use of the Acellular Dermal Matrix Graft in the Treatment of Gingival Recessions: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Study

Abstract: Both techniques provided significant root coverage, good esthetic results, and similar levels of postoperative discomfort. However, the control technique had statistically significantly better results for root coverage of localized gingival recessions.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
63
1
5

Year Published

2009
2009
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 74 publications
(72 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
(71 reference statements)
3
63
1
5
Order By: Relevance
“…ADM was chosen as a scaffold for gingival fibroblasts because of its three‐dimensional feature, suitable to be implanted in a host. ADM has already been shown to incorporate well into host tissues 26 in vivo and it provides favorable clinical outcomes in procedures for gingival tissue augmentation 16,17,27‐35 . Many studies were conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of ADM as a subepithelial graft compared to autogenous subepithelial connective tissue graft, with similar results between the two techniques with regard to root coverage 16,20,21,30 and gingival thickness 36 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…ADM was chosen as a scaffold for gingival fibroblasts because of its three‐dimensional feature, suitable to be implanted in a host. ADM has already been shown to incorporate well into host tissues 26 in vivo and it provides favorable clinical outcomes in procedures for gingival tissue augmentation 16,17,27‐35 . Many studies were conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of ADM as a subepithelial graft compared to autogenous subepithelial connective tissue graft, with similar results between the two techniques with regard to root coverage 16,20,21,30 and gingival thickness 36 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Synthetic resorbable polymers suffer from early loss of structural and mechanical properties with poor cell response [9, 10]. Natural resorbable polymers such as collagen are osteoinductive and an effective alternative to synthetic polymers due to their biocompatibility and excellent cell affinity [1113]. However, they often suffer from rapid hydrolytic and enzymatic degradation and lack sufficient mechanical properties [14, 15].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…91101 Collagen membranes derived from the extracellular matrix (ECM) of human skin and other sources have become important alternatives to their synthetic counterparts, due to their excellent cell affinity and biocompatibility. 89,102,103 Regrettably, type-I collagen has many limitations, such as low strength and fast degradation, that support the need for an improved material. 21 …”
Section: Advanced Biomaterials For Periodontal Regenerationmentioning
confidence: 99%