Submitted: 05 Nov 2019
Revision: 05 Mar 2020
Accepted: 15 Mar 2020
ePublished: 21 Apr 2020
EndNote EndNote

(Enw Format - Win & Mac)

BibTeX BibTeX

(Bib Format - Win & Mac)

Bookends Bookends

(Ris Format - Mac only)

EasyBib EasyBib

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Medlars Medlars

(Txt Format - Win & Mac)

Mendeley Web Mendeley Web
Mendeley Mendeley

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Papers Papers

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

ProCite ProCite

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Reference Manager Reference Manager

(Ris Format - Win only)

Refworks Refworks

(Refworks Format - Win & Mac)

Zotero Zotero

(Ris Format - Firefox Plugin)

J Adv Periodontol Implant Dent. 2020;12(1): 11-17.
doi: 10.34172/japid.2020.004
  Abstract View: 199
  PDF Download: 119

Research Article

Comparison of acellular dermal matrix allograft (ADMA) and a subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) for the treatment of gingival recession

Niloofar Jenabian 1 ORCID logo, Mohadese Yazdanpanahbahabadi 1 ORCID logo, Parya Haghpanah Aski 1* ORCID logo, Ali Bijani 2 ORCID logo

1 Department of Periodontics, Dental School, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Iran
2 Department of Non-communicable Pediatric Diseases Research Center, School of Dentistry, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Iran


Background. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of acellular dermal matrix allograft (ADMA) for the treatment of gingival recession as a substitute for subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG).

Methods. In this controlled clinical trial, 18 teeth were selected in nine subjects with bilateral gingival recession. One side was treated with SCTG and a coronally displaced flap as the control group, and the other side was treated with ADMA and a coronally displaced flap as the test group. Probing pocket depth (PPD), clinical attachment level, vertical recession depth, recession width, gingival thickness, keratinized tissue width, and the root coverage percentage were measured before the surgery and at 1-, 3-, and 6-month postoperative intervals. The healing index, pain index, and patient satisfaction were also investigated. The data were analyzed with a general linear model (GLM) repeated measures and paired t-test.

Results. All the parameters improved except for PPD; however, a comparison between the groups did not reveal statistically significant differences. Only root coverage percentage and pain index were significantly lower in the test group. The average percentage of root coverage in the control and test groups were 82.01±16.62% and 64.44±9.4%, respectively.

Conclusion. Both methods resulted in improvements in the clinical results. However, the use of the ADMA led to less pain and root coverage in comparison with the SCTG method.

Keywords: Allograft, Autologous, Gingival recession, Tooth root, Transplantation, Transplants
First Name
Last Name
Email Address
Security code

Abstract View: 199

Your browser does not support the canvas element.

PDF Download: 119

Your browser does not support the canvas element.