The aim of this study was to compare patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) of soft tissue substitutes versus autogenous grafts for soft tissue augmentation procedures at implant sites. Comprehensive and systematic literature searches were performed until December 2021. A focused question was formulated based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison and Outcome criteria (PICO): In patients with dental implants undergoing soft tissue augmentation (P), do soft tissue substitutes (I) compared to autogenous soft tissue graft (SCTG [subepithelial connective tissue graft]) (C) limit the post‐operative morbidity and other patient reported‐outcomes measures (O). Randomized controlled clinical trials, prospective‐, retrospective‐ and case‐series studies were included. Meta‐analyses were performed whenever possible and the results were expressed as weighted mean differences (WMD). A total of 29 clinical studies were included. For mucosal thickness gain, soft tissue substitutes significantly reduced the pain perception compared to SCTG (n = 4; WMD = 14.91 Visual Analog Scale [VAS] units; 95% confidence interval [CI] 6.42‐23.40; P < .0006) based on a 0‐100 VAS scale. Based on a 0‐10 VAS scale, a borderline significance of pain reduction was found when soft tissue substitutes were applied (n = 4; WMD = 1.62 VAS units; 95% CI 0.01‐3.23; P = .05). For keratinized tissue gain, soft tissue substitutes significantly reduced the pain perception after keratinized tissue augmentation compared to SCTG based on a 0‐100 VAS scale (n = 2; WMD = 21.43 VAS units; 95% CI 12.58‐30.28; P < .0001). Based on the 0‐10 VAS scale, soft tissue substitutes significantly reduced the pain as compared to SCTG (n = 4; WMD = 1.65 VAS units; 95% CI 0.66‐2.64; P = .001). Regarding pain medication, soft tissue substitutes required less painkillers (n = 6; WMD = 1.56 tablets; 95% CI 1.22‐1.91; P < .00001) after soft tissue augmentation. The surgery time was significantly reduced when soft tissue substitutes were used (n = 5; WMD = 10.9 minutes; 95% CI 4.60‐17.19; P < .00001). There were no significant differences in satisfaction, aesthetics, and quality of life (OHIP‐14) between soft tissue substitutes and autogenous grafts following soft tissue augmentation at implants sites. Soft tissue substitutes, compared to autogenous grafts, significantly improve PROMs following soft tissue augmentation at implant sites. Soft tissue substitutes can reduce pain perception, amounts of painkillers and surgery time while achieving similar levels of patient´s satisfaction as autogenous grafts without impairing the clinical outcomes. The current evidence indicates that they constitute a valid and reliable alternative to minimize the invasiveness in soft tissue augmentation procedures at implant sites.

Periodontal and peri-implant regeneration is the technique that aims to restore the damaged tissue around teeth and implants. They are surrounded by a different apparatus, and according to it, the regenerative procedure can differ for both sites. During the last century, several biomaterials and biological mediators were proposed to achieve a complete restoration of the damaged tissues with less invasiveness and a tailored approach. Based on relevant systematic reviews and articles searched on PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases, data regarding different biomaterials were extracted and summarized. Bone grafts of different origin, membranes for guided tissue regeneration, growth factors, and stem cells are currently the foundation of the routinary clinical practice. Moreover, a tailored approach, according to the patient and specific to the involved tooth or implant, is mandatory to achieve a better result and a reduction in patient morbidity and discomfort. The aim of this review is to summarize clinical findings and future developments regarding grafts, membranes, molecules, and emerging therapies. In conclusion, tissue engineering is constantly evolving; moreover, a tailor-made approach for each patient is essential to obtain a reliable result and the combination of several biomaterials is the elective choice in several conditions.

Aim: To evaluate the efficacy of recombinant human platelet‐derived growth factor (rhPDGF)‐BB combined with a cross‐linked collagen matrix (CCM) for the treatment of multiple adjacent gingival recession type 1 defects (MAGRs) in combination with the coronally advanced flap (CAF).Materials and Methods: Thirty patients were enrolled in this triple‐blind, randomized, placebo‐controlled trial and treated with either CAF + CCM + rhPDGF, or CAF + CCM + saline. The primary outcome was mean root coverage (mRC) at 6 months. Complete root coverage, gain in gingival thickness (GT), keratinized tissue width, volumetric and ultrasonographic changes, and patient‐reported outcome measures were also assessed. Mixed‐modelling regression analyses were used for statistical comparisons.Results: At 6 months, the mRC of the CCM + rhPDGF and CCM alone groups were 88.25% and 77.72%, respectively (p = .02). A significant gain in GT was consistently observed for both treatment arms, and more so for the patients receiving the matrix containing rhPDGF through time (0.51 vs. 0.80 mm, on average, p = .01). The rhPDGF + CCM treated patients presented greater volume gain, higher soft tissue thickness, and a superior aesthetic score.Conclusion: rhPDGF enhances the clinical, volumetric, and aesthetic outcomes of MAGRs above the results achieved with CAF + CCM alone (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04462237).

Background and Objectives: The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the efficacy of leukocyte–platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) in addition to coronally advanced flap (CAF) for the treatment of both single and multiple gingival recessions (GRs) compared to the CAF alone and to the adjunct of connective tissue graft (CTG). Root coverage outcomes using platelet concentrates have gained increased interest. In particular, it has been suggested that adding L-PRF to CAF may provide further benefits in the treatment of GRs. Materials and Methods: An electronic and manual literature search was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RTCs) investigating root coverage outcomes with CAF + L-PRF. The outcomes of interest included mean root coverage (mRC), recession reduction, keratinized tissue width (KTW) gain, gingival thickness (GT) gain, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROms) such as pain perception and discomfort. Results: A total of 275 patients and 611 surgical sites were analyzed. L-PRF in adjunct to single CAF seems to show statistically significant results regarding clinical attachment level (CAL) with a weighted means (WM) 0.43 95% CI (−0.04, 0.91), p < 0.0001, GT (WM 0.17 95% CI (−0.02, 0.36), p < 0.0001, and mRC (WM 13.95 95% CI (−1.99, 29.88) p < 0.0001, compared to single CAF alone. Interesting results were obtained from the adjunct of PRF to multiple CAF with respect to multiple CAF alone with an increase in the mRC WM 0.07 95% CI (−30.22, 30.35), p = 0.0001, and PPD change WM 0.26 95% CI (−0.06, 0.58), p < 00001. On the other hand, no statistically significant data were obtained when L-PRF was added to single or multiple CAF combined with CTG according to the included outcomes such as mRC (p = 0.03 overall). Conclusions: L-PRF is a valid alternative to CAF alone. L-PRF compared to CTG in single and multiple CAF showed statistically significant results regarding pain perception and discomfort PROms (p < 0.0001). However, CTG remains the gold standard for treating gingival recession.

Aim: To evaluate the efficacy of coronally advanced flap (CAF) versus tunnel technique (TUN) in covering isolated mid‐facial peri‐implant soft tissue dehiscences (PSTDs).Materials and Methods: Twenty‐eight participants presenting with isolated non‐molar implants exhibiting PSTDs were enrolled and randomized to receive either CAF or TUN, both with a connective tissue graft (CTG). The primary outcome of the study was the percentage of mean PSTD coverage at 12 months. Secondary endpoints included the frequency of complete PSTD coverage, changes in keratinized mucosa width (KMW) and horizontal mucosal thickness (MT), as assessed with transgingival probing, 3D optical scanning and ultrasonography, professional aesthetic evaluation and patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs).Results: At 12 months, the mean PSTD coverage of the CAF and TUN groups was 90.23% and 59.76%, respectively (p = .03). CAF‐treated sites showed a substantially higher frequency of complete PSTD coverage (p = .07), together with significantly greater gain of KMW (p = .01), increase in MT (p = .02), volumetric gain (p < .01) and professional aesthetic outcomes (p = .01). Both interventions showed an improvement in patient‐reported aesthetics and a reduction of the anxiety related to the appearance of the implant compared to baseline, with the CAF group obtaining significantly higher scores (p = .03 for both PROMs).Conclusions: CAF + CTG resulted in superior PSTD coverage outcomes, greater gain in KMW and MT, and better PROMs than TUN + CTG for the treatment of isolated PSTDs (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03498911).

Understanding the biological and morphological reactions of human cells towards different dentinal derivate grafting materials is fundamental for choosing the type of dentin for specific clinical situations. This study aimed to evaluate human periodontal ligament fibroblasts (hPLF) cells exposed to different dentinal derivates particles. The study design included the in vitro evaluation of mineralized dentine (SG), deproteinized and demineralized dentine (DDP), and demineralized dentine (TT) as test materials and of deproteinized bovine bone (BIOS) as the positive control material. The materials were kept with the hPLF cell line, and the evaluations were made after 24 h, 72 h, and 7 days of in vitro culture. The evaluated outcomes were proliferation by using XTT assays, the morphological characteristics by light microscopy (LM) and by the use of scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and adhesion by using confocal microscopy (CLSM). Overall, the experimental materials induced a positive response of the hPLFs in terms of proliferation and adhesion. The XTT assay showed the TT, and the SG induced significant growth compared to the negative control at 7 days follow-up. The morphological data supported the XTT assay: the LM observations showed the presence of densely packed cells with a modified shape; the SEM observations allowed the assessment of how fibroblasts exposed to DDP and TT presented cytoplasmatic extensions; and SG and BIOS also presented the thickening of the cellular membrane. The CLMS observations showed the expression of the proliferative marker, as well as and the expression of cytoskeletal elements involved in the adhesion process. In particular, the vinculin and integrin signals were stronger at 72 h, while the actin signal remained constantly expressed in all the follow-up of the sample exposed to SG material. The integrin signal was stronger at 72 h, and the vinculin and actin signals were stronger at 7 days follow-up in the sample exposed to DDP material. The vinculin and integrin signals were stronger at 72 h follow-up in the sample exposed to TT material; vinculin and integrin signals appear stronger at 24 h follow-up in the sample exposed to BIOS material. These data confirmed how dentinal derivates present satisfying biocompatibility and high conductivity and inductivity properties fundamental in the regenerative processes. Furthermore, the knowledge of the effects of the dentin’s degree of mineralization on cellular behavior will help clinicians choose the type of dentine derivates material according to the required clinical situation.