Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32519234›Full record

SynthesisClinical oral investigations2020

Clinical efficacy of xenogeneic and allogeneic 3D matrix in the management of gingival recession: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Márcio de Carvalho Formiga, Magda Aline Nagasawa, Vittorio Moraschini, Javier Ata-Ali, Anton Sculean, Jamil Awad Shibli

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical oral investigations, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Márcio de Carvalho FormigaDepartment of Periodontology and Oral Implantology, Dental Research Division, Guarulhos University, Guarulhos, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Magda Aline NagasawaDepartment of Periodontology and Oral Implantology, Dental Research Division, Guarulhos University, Guarulhos, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Vittorio MoraschiniDepartment of Periodontology, Fluminense Federal University, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Javier Ata-AliDepartment of Dentistry, Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Europea de Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
Anton SculeanDepartment of Periodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Jamil Awad ShibliDepartment of Periodontology and Oral Implantology, Dental Research Division, Guarulhos University, Guarulhos, Sao Paulo, Brazil. jshibli@ung.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1971-0195
Guarulhos University · BRUniversidade Federal Fluminense · BRUniversidad Europea de Madrid · ESUniversity of Bern · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveA systematic review and meta-analysis was thus conducted to answer the following focused question based on PICO strategy: Is there any 3D matrix biomaterial used for root coverage of human Miller class I and II defects equivalent with the connective tissue graft in localized defects of at least 2 mm and 3 mm? MATERIAL AND

methodsThe search on electronic database included MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Clinical Trials.gov, Web of Science, and New Zealand/Australian Clinical Trials. Only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compared connective tissue graft (CTG) with at least one 3D matrix alone for root coverage in Class I and II Miller localized defects of at least 2 mm, with at least 6 months follow-up, were included in this systematic review.

resultsA total of 14 studies were included for meta-analysis (12 compared CTG with acellular dermal matrix allograft and 2 compared CTG with Xenogenic Collagen Matrix). Relative root coverage showed no significant difference among the materials, for either 2 or 3 mm minimal recessions. For keratinized tissue width, on 2 mm recessions, CTG showed superiority above other biomaterials, but on 3 mm recessions, it seemed to have the same results. The percentage of recessions with complete root coverage for both 2 and 3 mm recessions showed similar results for all biomaterials.

conclusionsWith their limits, the present data concluded that CTG, acellular dermal matrix allograft, and xenogenic collagen matrix provided similar results for root coverage. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: To know if there is a 3D matrix with equivalent predictable results for root coverage, that we could avoid the morbidity of the connective tissue graft for these cases.

Indexed as

Biocompatible MaterialsConnective TissueGingival RecessionHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationGingivaHumansNew ZealandSurgical FlapsTooth RootTreatment OutcomeBiocompatible MaterialsConnective tissue graftGingival recessionResorbable biomaterialsRoot coverage

Identifiers

PMID32519234
OpenAlexW3033191680

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.