Abstract
Question: What is the efficacy of guided tissue regeneration (GTR) for recession defects and how does it compare to connective tissue grafts (CTG)?
Objective To summarise the efficacy of GTR for recession defects and compare this with connective tissue grafts (CTG).
Data sources Medline 1985–2000 (search terms not given).
Study selection English-language papers evaluating gingival recession in humans were included. Other criteria were not described and no details of independent evaluation decisions on study eligibility.
Data extraction Tables were constructed separately for GTR resorbable and nonresorbable barriers and for studies comparing GTR with CTG. Although no true meta-analyses were attempted, arithmetic means of outcomes were calculated pooling different study designs together.
Results Thirty studies were identified. From a mainly qualitative assessment, GTR appeared to offer no advantage over CTG with respect to clinical outcomes of root coverage. Technical difficulties of GTR were also highlighted including achieving primary flap closure and membrane exposure. Differences in study design and reporting hampered efforts to formally pool the data.
Conclusion The authors conclude that the use of GTR does not result in greater benefits than CTG alone.
Danesh-Meyer MJ, Wikesjö UME. Gingival recession defects and guided tissue regeneration: a review. J Periodont Res 2001; 36:341–354
Similar content being viewed by others
Article PDF
References
Tatakis, D and Trombelli, L Adverse effects associated with a bioabsorbable guided tissue regeneration device in the treatment of human gingival recession defects. A clinicopathologic case report. J Periodontol 1999) 70: 542–547.
Sutherland, SE, Matthews, DC and Fendrich, P Clinical practice guidelines in dentistry. Part II. By dentists, for dentists. J Can Dent Assoc 2001) 67: 448–452.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Address for correspondence: Professor UME Wikesjö, Temple University School of Dentistry, Department of Periodontology, 3223 North Broad Street, Philadelphia PA 19140, USA.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Matthews, D. GTR may have no added value over connective tissue grafts for gingival recession defects. Evid Based Dent 3, 103–104 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ebd.6400144
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ebd.6400144