Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 17, 2026
09:30
Tissue Characterization after a New Disaggregation Method for Skin Micro-Grafts Generation
Published on: March 4, 2016
22.0K
Cross-Linked Volume-Stable Collagen Matrix Versus Connective Tissue Graft for Soft Tissue Augmentation at Implant
Francesco Cairo1, Cosimo Rupe1, Raffaele Cavalcanti2
1EFP Master Program in Periodontology and Implant Dentistry and Research Unit in Periodontology and Periodontal Medicine, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Clinical Oral Implants Research
|September 23, 2025
Summary
Connective tissue graft (CTG) significantly increased buccal peri-implant mucosal thickness (MT) more than cross-linked volume-stable collagen matrix (VCMX). Both VCMX and CTG improved MT, with VCMX offering shorter chair time and less discomfort.
Area of Science:
- Periodontology
- Dental Implantology
- Tissue Engineering
Background:
- Soft tissue augmentation around dental implants is crucial for long-term success.
- Increasing buccal peri-implant mucosal thickness (MT) can enhance aesthetics and implant stability.
- Both connective tissue graft (CTG) and cross-linked volume-stable collagen matrix (VCMX) are used for soft tissue augmentation.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the efficacy of VCMX versus CTG in increasing buccal peri-implant MT.
- To evaluate secondary outcomes including patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), complications, and keratinized mucosa width (KMW).
Main Methods:
- A parallel, randomized multi-center clinical trial involving 98 patients.
- Patients received either CTG or VCMX for soft tissue augmentation.
- The primary outcome was MT difference at 12 months, analyzed using ANCOVA.
Main Results:
- CTG demonstrated superior MT gain (1.0 ± 0.75 mm) compared to VCMX (0.66 ± 0.58 mm), with a statistically significant difference (p=0.002).
- In cases with baseline MT ≥ 2 mm, both techniques yielded comparable results.
- VCMX was associated with significantly shorter chair time (10 min difference) and fewer days of postoperative discomfort.
Conclusions:
- Both CTG and VCMX effectively improve peri-implant mucosal thickness.
- CTG showed statistically superior results for MT gain compared to VCMX.
- VCMX offers advantages in reduced chair time and postoperative discomfort, while both procedures result in high patient satisfaction.
