medigraphic.com
ISSN 1870-199X (Print)
Órgano oficial de la Facultad de Odontología, UNAM

2009, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Rev Odont Mex 2009; 13 (2)

Clinical characterization of autologus grafts developed from gingival fibroblasts grown in a biological matrix for the treatment of gingival recessions: Case report

Monteagudo ACA, Marín GMG, Enriquez HF, Penilla AI, Krötzsch E, Cano CS

Language: Spanish
References: 26
Page: 115-121
PDF size: 281.41 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Background: Tissue engineering has been developed and used in different fields of contemporary medicine and dentistry. The purpose of this study was to develop autologous grafts based on the culture of gingival fibroblasts supported in a biological matrix for the coverage of root exposure in gingival recessions. Methods: A healthy patient with generalized gingival recessions and limitated prognosis for mucogingival conventional procedures was treated in this study. A palatal biopsy was carried out to develop a cellular line, the gingival tissue was transported in a sterile 50 mL tube with culture medium (D-MEM). Gingival fibroblasts grew in 75 cm˛ culture bottles during eight days. In confluence 1 million cells per cm2 were counted. Subsequently, they were scattered in a submucosal intestinal pig membrane (OASIS®). The bioimplant was grafted fifteen days after biopsy was taken. The receptor site was prepared with a mucoperiosteal flap design. The graft was fixed with poliglycolic acid suture, later the flap was coronally displaced. Results: It was observed a stable wound healing during the monitorization of the first and second month, with mature gingival epithelium on the apical third of the root coverage in the first upper right molar. No coverage was observed in the first and second upper premolars.


REFERENCES

  1. The American of Periodontology. Glossary of Periodontal Terms. 3rd ed. Chicago: The American Academy of Periodontology, 1992:41.

  2. Sagnes G, Gjermo P. Prevalence of oral soft and hard tissue lesions related to mechanical tooth cleaning procedures. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1976; 4: 77-83.

  3. Anerud KE, Robertson PB, Löe H, Periodontal disease in three young adult populations. J Periodont Res 1983; 18: 655-668.

  4. Miller PD. A classification of marginal tissue recession. Int J Periodontics Res Dent 1985; 5: 8-13.

  5. Miller PD. A classification of marginal tissue recession. Int J Periodontics Res Dent 1985; 5: 8-13.

  6. Vehkalahti M. Occurrence of gingival recession in adults. J Periodontol 1989; 60: 599-603.

  7. Oates T. Surgical Therapies for the Treatment of Gingival Recession. A Systematic Review. Ann Periodontol 2003; 8: 303-320.

  8. Langer B, Langer L. Subepithelial connective tissue graft technique for root coverage. J Periodontol 1985; 56: 715-720.

  9. Sato N. Chap 6 Periodontal Plastic Surgery. In: Sato N. Periodontal surgery: A clinical atlas. Quintessence Publishing Co, Illinois USA, 2000: 343-355.

  10. Tarnow DP. Semilunar coronally repositioned flap. J of Clin Periodontol 1986; 13: 182-185.

  11. Kazunari A. Improvement of multiple facial gingival recession by non-surgical and supportive periodontal therapy: A case report. J Periodontol 1999; 70: 909-913.

  12. Lindhe J, Karring T, Lang NP. Clinical periodontology and implant dentistry. 4th ed. Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 2004: 569-591.

  13. Friedman, N. Mucogingival surgery. Texas Dental Journal 1957; 75: 358-362.

  14. Hode. Naturally occurring scaffolds for soft tissue repair and regeneration. Unt Health Science Cente 2002: 295-308.

  15. Myers, A hyaluronic acid membrane delivery system for cultured keratinocytes: Clinical take rates in the porcine kerato dermanl model. J Burn Care Rehabil 1997; 18: 214-222.

  16. Demling R, Niezgoda J, Haraway D, Mostow E. Small Intestinal submucosa Wound Matrix and Full-thickness Venous Ulcers: Preliminary Results. Wounds 2004; 16(1): 18-22.

  17. Momose M, Masashi M, Vascular endothelial growth factor and transforming growth factor-a and –ß1 are released from human cultured gingival epithelial sheets. J Periodontol 2002; 73: 748-753.

  18. Brown-Etris M, Cutshall W, A new biomaterial derived from small intestine submucosa and developed into a wound matrix Device. Wouns 2002; 14(4): 150-166.

  19. McPherson T, Badylak S, Characterization of fibronectin derived from porcine small intestinal submucosa. Tissue Engineering 1998; 4(1): 75-82.

  20. Hode J, Badylak S, Glycosaminoglycan conten of small intestinal submucosa: A bioscaffold for tissue replacement. Tissue Engineering 1996; 2(3): 209-217.

  21. Lindberg K, Badylak S, Porcine small intestine submucosa (SIS): a bioscaffold supporting in vitro primary human epidermal cell differentiation and synthesis of basement membrane proteins. Burns 2001: 254-266.

  22. Piniprato. Tissue engineering tech for gingival augmentation procedures. A case report. Int J Perio and Rest Dentistry 2000; 20: 553-559.

  23. Wikesjö U, Selvig K, Periodontal wound healing and regeneration. Periodontology 2000; 19, 1999, 21-39.

  24. Martin P. Wound healing – aiming for perfect skin regeneration. Science 1997; 276: 75–81.

  25. Aukhill I. Biology of wound healing. Periodontology 2000; 22: 44-50.

  26. Cavallini M. Autologous fibroblasts to treat deep and complicated leg ulcers in diabetic patients. Wound Rep Reg 2007; 15: 35-38.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com