Root regrowth in single tooth recession using Mucograft® collagen matrix compared to autogenous graft: a literature review

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v12i3.40637

Keywords:

Gingival Retraction; Oral Surgical Procedures; Periodontics.

Abstract

The treatment of gingival recession besides providing greater comfort to the patient by reducing sensitivity, restores the normal positioning of the gingival tissue and improves aesthetics. Fast surgical procedures with less painful symptoms would be ideal in clinical practice for root coverage. Thus, biomaterials substitutes to autogenous grafts are increasingly being researched. Thus, the aim of this study is to verify under review of the updated scientific literature, clinical articles that performed root coverage in single tooth recessions using Mucograft® compared to autogenous grafts. For this, the term Mucograft® was used for searches in Pubmed and Google, and 48 results were obtained. Of these, 9 articles were selected. 6 studies evaluated the percentage of root coverage, while 2 evaluated the increase in the range of keratinized tissue and 1 the histological changes. The use of Mucograft® showed positive results regarding the ability of root coverage with good aesthetics and level of postoperative pain similar to that obtained by autogenous grafting. Scientific evidence shows that Mucograft® Matrix is a promising material, but longer follow-up studies are needed to help clinicians in their choices.

References

Amin, P. N., Bissada, N. F., Ricchetti, P. A., Silva, A. P. B., & Demko, C. A. (2018). Tuberosity versus palatal donor sites for soft tissue grafting: A split-mouth clinical study. Quintessence Int, 49(7), 589-598. 10.3290/j.qi.a40510

Aras D. K., Özkoçer, Ö., Uraz, A., Yalım, M. (2021). Efficacy of Collagen Matrix (Mucograft® and Mucoderm®) Versus Free Gingival Graft to Enhance the Width of Keratinized Tissue Around Implants. ADO Klinik Bilimler Dergisi, 10(2), 77-84.

Barakat, H., & Dayoub, S. (2020). Treatment of miller type I and II gingival recession defects using three-dimensional porcine collagen matrix with coronally advanced flap: A randomized clinical split-mouth trial (a 1-year follow-up). Indian J Dent Res, 31(2), 209-216. 10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_897_18

Cairo, F. (2017). Periodontal plastic surgery of gingival recessions at single and multiple teeth. Periodontol 2000, 75(1), 296-316. 10.1111/prd.12186

Cardaropoli, D., Tamagnone, L., Roffredo, A., & Gaveglio, L. (2012). Treatment of gingival recession defects using coronally advanced flap with a porcine collagen matrix compared to coronally advanced flap with connective tissue graft: a randomized controlled clinical trial. J Periodontol, 83(3), 321-328. 10.1902/jop.2011.110215

Caton, J. G., Armitage, G., Berglundh, T., Chapple, I. L. C., Jepsen, S., Kornman, K. S., . . . Tonetti, M. S. (2018). A new classification scheme for periodontal and peri-implant diseases and conditions - Introduction and key changes from the 1999 classification. J Clin Periodontol, 45 Suppl 20, S1-s8. 10.1111/jcpe.12935

Chambrone, L., Chambrone, D., Pustiglioni, F. E., Chambrone, L. A., & Lima, L. A. (2008). Can subepithelial connective tissue grafts be considered the gold standard procedure in the treatment of Miller Class I and II recession-type defects? J Dent, 36(9), 659-671. 10.1016/j.jdent.2008.05.007

Chevalier, G., Cherkaoui, S., Kruk, H., Bensaid, X., & Danan, M. (2017). Xenogeneic Collagen Matrix Versus Connective Tissue Graft: Case Series of Various Gingival Recession Treatments. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 37(1), 117-123. 10.11607/prd.2536

Consensus report. Mucogingival therapy. (1996). Ann Periodontol, 1(1), 702-706. 10.1902/annals.1996.1.1.702

Cordeiro, A. M., Oliveira, G. M. d., Rentería, J. M., & Guimarães, C. A. (2007). Revisão sistemática: uma revisão narrativa. Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões, 34.

Dominiak, M., Mierzwa-Dudek, D., Puzio, M., & Gedrange, T. (2012). Clinical evaluation of the effectiveness of using a collagen matrix (Mucograft® prototype) in gingival recession coverage – a pilot study. Journal of Stomatology (Czasopismo Stomatologiczne), 65(2), 188-202. 10.5604/00114553.996480

Esposito, M., Coulthard, P., Thomsen, P., & Worthington, H. V. (2004). Enamel matrix derivative for periodontal tissue regeneration in treatment of intrabony defects: a Cochrane systematic review. J Dent Educ, 68(8), 834-844.

Fu, J. H., Su, C. Y., & Wang, H. L. (2012). Esthetic soft tissue management for teeth and implants. J Evid Based Dent Pract, 12(3 Suppl), 129-142. 10.1016/s1532-3382(12)70025-8

Ghanaati, S., Schlee, M., Webber, M. J., Willershausen, I., Barbeck, M., Balic, E., Kirkpatrick, C. J. (2011). Evaluation of the tissue reaction to a new bilayered collagen matrix in vivo and its translation to the clinic. Biomed Mater, 6(1), 015010. 10.1088/1748-6041/6/1/015010

Goyal, N., Gupta, R., Pandit, N., & Dahiya, P. (2014). Analysis of patient acceptance following treatment of Miller's class II gingival recession with acellular dermal matrix and connective tissue graft. J Indian Soc Periodontol, 18(3), 352-356. 10.4103/0972-124x.134574

Hirooka, H. (1998). The biologic concept for the use of enamel matrix protein: true periodontal regeneration. Quintessence Int, 29(10), 621-630.

Kassab, M. M., & Cohen, R. E. (2003). The etiology and prevalence of gingival recession. J Am Dent Assoc, 134(2), 220-225. 10.14219/jada.archive.2003.0137

Langer, B., & Langer, L. (1985). Subepithelial connective tissue graft technique for root coverage. J Periodontol, 56(12), 715-720. 10.1902/jop.1985.56.12.715

Mathias-Santamaria, I. F., Silveira, C. A., Rossato, A., Sampaio de Melo, M. A., Bresciani, E., & Santamaria, M. P. (2022). Single gingival recession associated with non-carious cervical lesion treated by partial restoration and coronally advanced flap with or without xenogenous collagen matrix: A randomized clinical trial evaluating the coverage procedures and restorative protocol. J Periodontol, 93(4), 504-514. 10.1002/jper.21-0358

Menceva, Z., Dimitrovski, O., Popovska, M., Spasovski, S., Spirov, V., & Petrushevska, G. (2018). Free Gingival Graft versus Mucograft: Histological Evaluation. Open Access Maced J Med Sci, 6(4), 675-679. 10.3889/oamjms.2018.127

Moreira, A. R. O., Santamaria, M. P., Silvério, K. G., Casati, M. Z., Nociti Junior, F. H., Sculean, A., & Sallum, E. A. (2016). Coronally advanced flap with or without porcine collagen matrix for root coverage: a randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig, 20(9), 2539-2549. 10.1007/s00784-016-1757-8

Rokn, A., Zare, H., & Haddadi, P. (2020). Use of Mucograft Collagen Matrix(®) versus Free Gingival Graft to Augment Keratinized Tissue around Teeth: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. Front Dent, 17(5), 1-8. 10.18502/fid.v17i1.3965

Sanz, M., Lorenzo, R., Aranda, J. J., Martin, C., & Orsini, M. (2009). Clinical evaluation of a new collagen matrix (Mucograft prototype) to enhance the width of keratinized tissue in patients with fixed prosthetic restorations: a randomized prospective clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol, 36(10), 868-876. 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2009.01460.x

Schmitt, C. M., Moest, T., Lutz, R., Wehrhan, F., Neukam, F. W., & Schlegel, K. A. (2016). Long-term outcomes after vestibuloplasty with a porcine collagen matrix (Mucograft(®) ) versus the free gingival graft: a comparative prospective clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res, 27(11), e125-e133. 10.1111/clr.12575

Stefanini, M., Marzadori, M., Aroca, S., Felice, P., Sangiorgi, M., & Zucchelli, G. (2018). Decision making in root-coverage procedures for the esthetic outcome. Periodontol 2000, 77(1), 54-64. 10.1111/prd.12205

Suárez-López Del Amo, F., Rodriguez, J. C., Asa'ad, F., & Wang, H. L. (2019). Comparison of two soft tissue substitutes for the treatment of gingival recession defects: an animal histological study. J Appl Oral Sci, 27, e20180584. 10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0584

Tugnait, A., & Clerehugh, V. (2001). Gingival recession—its significance and management. Journal of Dentistry, 29(6), 381-394. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(01)00035-5

Vignoletti, F., Nuñez, J., de Sanctis, F., Lopez, M., Caffesse, R., & Sanz, M. (2015). Healing of a xenogeneic collagen matrix for keratinized tissue augmentation. Clin Oral Implants Res, 26(5), 545-552. 10.1111/clr.12441

Wennström, J., Lindhe, J., & Nyman, S. (1981). Role of keratinized gingiva for gingival health. Clinical and histologic study of normal and regenerated gingival tissue in dogs. J Clin Periodontol, 8(4), 311-328. 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1981.tb02041.x

Zucchelli, G., & Mounssif, I. (2015). Periodontal plastic surgery. Periodontol 2000, 68(1), 333-368. 10.1111/prd.12059

Zucchelli, G., Tavelli, L., McGuire, M. K., Rasperini, G., Feinberg, S. E., Wang, H. L., & Giannobile, W. V. (2020). Autogenous soft tissue grafting for periodontal and peri-implant plastic surgical reconstruction. J Periodontol, 91(1), 9-16. 10.1002/jper.19-0350

Published

15/03/2023

How to Cite

MATOS, F. G. .; MOURA, G. B. de . Root regrowth in single tooth recession using Mucograft® collagen matrix compared to autogenous graft: a literature review. Research, Society and Development, [S. l.], v. 12, n. 3, p. e24012340637, 2023. DOI: 10.33448/rsd-v12i3.40637. Disponível em: https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/40637. Acesso em: 13 oct. 2024.

Issue

Section

Health Sciences