The present review compared the efficacy of soft tissue substitutes (STS) and autogenous free gingival graft (FGG) or connective tissue graft (CTG) in mucogingival procedures to increase keratinized tissue (KT) width around teeth and implants.
Two independent examiners performed the electronic search on Medline and Cochrane Library based on the following PICO’s format: (P) adult patients; (I) soft tissue substitutes and FGG/CTG; (C) STS vs CTG; STS vs FGG; STS vs CTR; (O) KT width gain; (S) Systematic Reviews, Randomized Controlled Trials. Results showed that around teeth, all biomaterials showed superior performance compared to CAF alone for treating gingival recessions. However, when compared to CTG, ADM yields the most similar outcomes to the gold standard (CTG), even though in multiple recessions CTG still continue to be considered the most favorable approach. Use of STSs (acellular matrix or tissue engineered) in combination with an apically positioned flap resulted in a significantly less gain of KTW compared to what achieved with FGG and APF.
Around dental implants, free gingival grafts were deemed more effective than soft tissue substitutes in enhancing keratinized mucosa width.