Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42154446›Full record

Trial reportJournal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.]2026

Soft Tissue Volume Augmentation at Single Implant Sites Applying Collagen Matrices or Connective Tissue Grafts: 10-Year Follow-Up of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Franz J Strauss, Margherita G Liguori, Thomas J W Gasser, Nadja Naenni, Ronald E Jung, Daniel S Thoma

Abstract readEquivalence TrialRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.], 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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.

Franz J StraussDiscipline of Periodontics, The University of Sydney, School of Dentistry, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5832-7327
Margherita G LiguoriClinic of Reconstructive Dentistry, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Thomas J W GasserPrivate Practice, Basel, Switzerland.
Nadja NaenniClinic of Reconstructive Dentistry, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Ronald E JungClinic of Reconstructive Dentistry, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2055-1320
Daniel S ThomaClinic of Reconstructive Dentistry, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1764-7447

Funding

Geistlich PharmaOsteology Foundation 1505680
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo compare up to 10 years clinical, profilometric and patient-reported outcomes of implant sites previously augmented using a volume-stable collagen matrix (VCMX) or connective tissue graft (SCTG) in the aesthetic zone.

methodsThe original non-inferiority randomized controlled trial (RCT) enrolled 20 patients who received soft tissue volume augmentation with VCMX or SCTG at single implant sites. Clinical assessments and standardized measurements were performed at baseline after crown insertion and at 6 months, 1, 3, 5, 7.5, and 10 years. The primary outcome was mucosal thickness. Secondary outcomes included marginal bone levels (MBL), probing depth (PD), bleeding on probing (BOP), plaque control record, Pink Aesthetic Score (PES), OHIP-14 and buccal profilometric changes. Group comparisons were performed using mixed-effects and generalized estimating equation (GEE) models, which account for within-patient correlations due to repeated measurements and allow inclusion of all available data without requiring imputation for missing observations.

resultsOf the 20 originally enrolled patients, 10 (5 in the SCTG group and 5 in the VCMX group) were available for re-examination at 10 years. The adjusted between-group difference in mucosal thickness was -0.02 mm (95% CI -0.99 to 0.96). As the lower bound of the confidence interval remained above the prespecified non-inferiority margin of -1 mm, non-inferiority of VCMX was shown. Buccal contour changes were comparable during the early follow-up, while a trend toward a greater long-term contour decrease was observed in group VCMX (-0.31 mm [95% CI, -0.65 to 0.03]; p = 0.07). Mean PES values were 10.6 in the SCTG group and 9.6 in the VCMX group, with no significant between-group differences (p = 0.45). Both groups revealed high levels of oral health-related quality of life, with low median OHIP-14 scores (SCTG, 0.0; VCMX, 1.0; p = 0.26).

conclusionThese preliminary long-term findings showed no clinically relevant differences between SCTG and VCMX in terms of clinical, profilometric and patient-reported outcomes. While SCTG remains the reference standard, VCMX represents a less invasive alternative but with a slight tendency toward greater long-term contour reduction. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Volume-stable collagen matrices serve as a viable alternative to autogenous connective tissue grafts for peri-implant soft tissue volume augmentation, particularly in patients seeking a reduced morbidity, without compromising long-term clinical or aesthetic outcomes.

trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00017484.

Indexed as

CollagenConnective TissueDental Implants, Single-ToothGingivaAdultEsthetics, DentalFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedCollagenaestheticscollagen matrixconnective tissuedental implantspatient‐reported outcome measuresperi‐implant mucosasoft‐tissue augmentation

Identifiers

PMID42154446
PMCPMC13576781

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.