» Articles » PMID: 33430382

Clinical and Histological Differences Between Guided Tissue Regeneration with Acellular Dermal Matrix of Porcine Origin and Autologous Connective Tissue: An Animal Study

Overview
Publisher MDPI
Date 2021 Jan 12
PMID 33430382
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

This research aims to evaluate the clinical and histological parametric differences concerning keratinized tissue that result from two regeneration techniques, the subepithelial autologous connective tissue graft (ACTG) and the acellular dermal matrix (MD) of porcine origin, performed on surgical beds on edentulous spaces in an animal model. The parameters of the MD and ACTG groups were compared with samples of the control group (CG) after 15, 45, and 90 days. Nine female white pigs () were used, and each animal provided 20 study areas (12 MD and 8 ACTG). At 15 days, the keratin layer thickness in the MD group was greater than those of the ACTG (25.27 vs. 19.95 μm) and the CG (21.2 μm). After 45 days, the MD and ACTG thickness values decreased but were higher than the CG. At 90 days, MD (19.46 μm) obtained a value close to that of CG, and the ACTG decreased to CG (15.53 μm, < 0.001). The use of an MD may be a viable alternative to the ACTG because of its ability to provide increased keratinized tissue in comparison to the ACTG.

Citing Articles

A Narrative Review on the Effectiveness of Bone Regeneration Procedures with OsteoBiol Collagenated Porcine Grafts: The Translational Research Experience over 20 Years.

Romasco T, Tumedei M, Inchingolo F, Pignatelli P, Montesani L, Iezzi G J Funct Biomater. 2022; 13(3).

PMID: 35997459 PMC: 9397035. DOI: 10.3390/jfb13030121.


Use of Xenogenic Collagen Matrices in Peri-Implant Soft Tissue Volume Augmentation: A Critical Review on the Current Evidence and New Technique Presentation.

De Annuntiis C, Testarelli L, Guarnieri R Materials (Basel). 2022; 15(11).

PMID: 35683237 PMC: 9182004. DOI: 10.3390/ma15113937.


Porcine Acellular Dermal Matrix: An Alternative to Connective Tissue Graft-A Narrative Review.

Dadlani S Int J Dent. 2021; 2021:1652032.

PMID: 34527053 PMC: 8437668. DOI: 10.1155/2021/1652032.

References
1.
Nevins M . Tissue-engineered bilayered cell therapy for the treatment of oral mucosal defects: a case series. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2010; 30(1):31-9. View

2.
Chambrone L, Ortega M, Sukekava F, Rotundo R, Kalemaj Z, Buti J . Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession-type defects. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018; 10:CD007161. PMC: 6517255. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007161.pub3. View

3.
Cieslik-Wegemund M, Wierucka-Mlynarczyk B, Tanasiewicz M, Gilowski L . Tunnel Technique With Collagen Matrix Compared With Connective Tissue Graft for Treatment of Periodontal Recession: A Randomized Clinical Trial. J Periodontol. 2016; 87(12):1436-1443. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2016.150676. View

4.
Scheyer E, Nevins M, Neiva R, Cochran D, Giannobile W, Woo S . Generation of site-appropriate tissue by a living cellular sheet in the treatment of mucogingival defects. J Periodontol. 2013; 85(4):e57-64. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2013.130348. View

5.
Sanz M, Lorenzo R, Aranda J, Martin C, Orsini M . 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. 2009; 36(10):868-76. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2009.01460.x. View