Navarro NC, Zerón A

Idioma: Español
Referencias bibliográficas: 26
Paginas: 115-123
Archivo PDF: 86.93 Kb.

RESUMEN

El objetivo de esta revisión sistemática fue comparar la eficacia de dos técnicas quirúrgicas mucogingivales utilizadas para la cobertura radicular y el aumento del tejido queratinizado, el injerto de tejido conectivo subepitelial y el injerto de matriz dérmica acelular. Ambos procedimientos fueron efectivos para el mejoramiento de los parámetros clínicos evaluados y no se encontraron diferencias estadísticamente significativas entre ellas. Sí existió una diferencia estadísticamente significativa en cuanto al aumento de la cantidad de encía queratinizada, siendo mayor cuando se utilizaba injerto de tejido conectivo subepitelial.

REFERENCIAS (EN ESTE ARTÍCULO)

1. Joly JC, Carvalho AM, da Silva RC, Ciotti DL, Cury PR. Root coverage in isolated gingival recessions using autograft versus allograft: a pilot study. J Periodontol 2007; 78 (6): 1017-22.

2. Oates TW, Robinson M, Gunsolley JC. Surgical therapies for the treatment of gingival recession. A systematic review. Ann Periodontol 2003; 8 (1): 303-20.

3. Cummings LC, Kaldahl WB, Allen EP. Histologic evaluation of autogenous connective tissue and acellular dermal matrix grafts in humans. J Periodontol 2005; 76 (2): 178-86.

4. Langer B, Langer L. Subepithelial connective tissue graft technique for root coverage. J Periodontol 1985; 56 (12): 715-20.

5. Tarun Kumar AB. Comparative evaluation of supepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) and acellular dermal matrix allograft in the treatment of localized gingival recession- a clinical study. Journal of International Clinical Dentistry Research Organ 2009; 1: 8-16.

6. Gapski R, Parks CA, Wang HL. Acellular dermal matrix for mucogingival surgery: a meta-analysis. J Periodontol 2005; 76 (11): 1814-22.

7. Barros RR, Novaes AB, Grisi MF et al. New surgical approach for root coverage of localized gingival recession with acellular dermal matrix: a 12-month comparative clinical study. J Esthet Restor Dent 2005; 17 (3): 156-64.

8. Tal H, Moses O, Zohar R, Meir H, Nemcovsky C. Root coverage of advanced gingival recession: a comparative study between acellular dermal matrix allograft and subepithelial connective tissue grafts. J Periodontol 2002; 73 (12): 1405-11.

9. Novaes AB, Grisi DC, Molina GO et al. Comparative 6-month clinical study of a subepithelial connective tissue graft and acellular dermal matrix graft for the treatment of gingival recession. J Periodontol 2001; 72 (11): 1477-84.

10. Sadat MAS, Eslami MM. A comparative 6 month clinical study of acellular dermal matrix allograft and subepithelial connective tissue graft for root coverage. Journal of Dentistry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2010; 7 (3): 156-64.

11. Aichelmann-Reidy ME, Yukna RA, Evans GH, Nasr HF, Mayer ET. Clinical evaluation of acellular allograft dermis for the treatment of human gingival recession. J Periodontol 2001; 72 (8): 998-1005.

12. Paolantonio M, Dolci M, Esposito P et al. Subpedicle acellular dermal matrix graft and autogenous connective tissue graft in the treatment of gingival recessions: a comparative 1-year clinical study. J Periodontol 2002; 73 (11): 1299-307.

13. Haghighati FMM, Moslemi N. Comparative clinical evalutaion os subepithelial connective tissue graft and acellular dermal matrix allograft for the treatment of gingival recession. Journal of Dentistry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2006; 3 (4): 159-66.

14. Harris RJ. Histologic evaluation of root coverage obtained with GTR in humans: a case report. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2001; 21 (3): 240-51.

15. Henderson RD, Greenwell H, Drisko C et al. Predictable multiple site root coverage using an acellular dermal matrix allograft. J Periodontol 2001; 72 (5): 571-82.

16. Wei PC, Laurell L, Geivelis M, Lingen MW, Maddalozzo D. Acellular dermal matrix allografts to achieve increased attached gingiva. Part 1. A clinical study. J Periodontol 2000; 71 (8): 1297-305.

17. Zucchelli G, Amore C, Sforzal NM, Montebugnoli L, De Sanctis M. Bilaminar techniques for the treatment of recession-type defects: A comparative clinical study. J Clin Periodontol 2003; 30 (10): 862-70.

18. Harris RJ. A comparative study of root coverage obtained with an acellular dermal matrix versus a connective tissue graft: results of 107 recession defects in 50 consecutively treated patients. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2000; 20 (1): 51-9.

19. Harris RJ. Root coverage with a connective tissue with partial thickness double pedicle graft and an acellular dermal matrix graft: a clinical and histological evaluation of a case report. J Periodontol 1998; 69 (11): 1305-11.

20. Harris RJ. A short-term and long-term comparison of root coverage with an acellular dermal matrix and a subepithelial graft. J Periodontol 2004; 75 (5): 734-43.

21. Wei PC, Laurell L, Lingen MW, Geivelis M. Acellular dermal matrix allografts to achieve increased attached gingiva. Part 2. A histological comparative study. J Periodontol 2002; 73 (3): 257-65.

22. Hirsch A, Goldstein M, Goultschin J, Boyan BD, Schwartz Z. A 2-year follow-up of root coverage using sub-pedicle acellular dermal matrix allografts and subepithelial connective tissue autografts. J Periodontol 2005; 76 (8): 1323-8.

23. Gher ME, Williams JE, Vernino AR, Strong DM, Pelleu GB. Evaluation of the immunogenicity of freeze-dried skin allografts in humans. J Periodontol 1980; 51 (10): 571-7.

24. Yukna RA, Sullivan WM. Evaluation of resultant tissue type following the intraoral transplantation of various lyophilized soft tissues. J Periodontal Res 1978; 13 (2): 177-84.

25. Barker TS, Cueva MA, Rivera-Hidalgo F, Beach MM, Rossmann JA, Kerns DG, Crump TB, Shulman JD. A comparative study of root coverage using two different acellular dermal matrix products. J Periodontol 2010; 81 (11): 1596-603.

26. Consensus Report Mucogingival Therapy Annals of Periodontology 1996; 1 (1): 702-706.