Comparison of two differently processed acellular dermal matrix products for root coverage procedures: a prospective,...

Area of Science:

• Periodontology
• Biomaterials Science
• Regenerative Dentistry

Background:

• Gingival recession defects affect numerous patients, impacting oral health and aesthetics.
• Acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) are utilized for root coverage procedures.
• Different processing methods may influence ADM efficacy.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare freeze-dried (FDADM) and solvent-dehydrated (SDADM) acellular dermal matrices for treating Miller Class I and II gingival recession.
• To evaluate the clinical outcomes of two distinct ADM processing techniques.

Main Methods:

• A multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial enrolled 80 participants with single maxillary anterior recession defects.
• Participants received either coronally advanced flap (CAF) + FDADM or CAF + SDADM.
• Key clinical parameters were assessed pre-operatively and up to 52 weeks post-operatively.

Main Results:

• Both treatment groups demonstrated significant improvements in most clinical parameters compared to baseline after one year.
• Root coverage percentages were comparable: 77.21% ± 29.10% for FDADM and 71.01% ± 32.87% for SDADM.
• No statistically significant differences were found between FDADM and SDADM for most clinical outcomes, except for probing depth on the mesial side of defects.

Conclusions:

• Both freeze-dried (FDADM) and solvent-dehydrated (SDADM) acellular dermal matrices are effective in correcting Miller Class I and II gingival recession defects.
• The processing method of ADM did not lead to statistically significant differences in clinical outcomes after one year.