ReviewJournal of oral & maxillofacial research
Peri-Implant Soft-Tissue Augmentation Using Xenogeneic Collagen Matrices
Review in Journal of oral & maxillofacial research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes of peri-implant soft tissue augmentation using xenogeneic collagen matrices and autogenous subepithelial connective tissue grafts in single-tooth implant therapy. The review focused on key clinical parameters, including marginal bone loss, soft tissue thickness gain, mid-buccal recession, and aesthetic outcomes assessed by the pink aesthetic score. Material and Methods: This systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive electronic search was performed in MEDLINE (PubMed), ScienceDirect, and the Cochrane Library for studies published between November 18, 2015, and November 18, 2025. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials, prospective clinical trials, and cohort studies evaluating peri-implant soft tissue augmentation using xenogeneic collagen matrices compared with autogenous subepithelial connective tissue grafts. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist. Results: A total of 839 records were identified, of which six studies met the inclusion criteria. Both treatment modalities demonstrated favourable clinical outcomes. Marginal bone loss was generally limited, with no consistent statistically significant differences between groups, although one study reported greater bone loss in the xenogeneic group. Soft tissue thickness gain showed a trend favouring autogenous grafts. Mid-buccal recession data were limited but suggested slightly greater recession in the xenogeneic group. Aesthetic outcomes were comparable between groups. Conclusions: Both treatment modalities are effective; however, autogenous grafts provide more consistent soft tissue thickness gain, while collagen matrices represent a viable alternative with comparable aesthetic and bone outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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 Socratic graph.