{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03998161764705882, 'fraction_numerical': 0.014246323529411764, 'mean_word_length': 4.867924528301887, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 1, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Long-Term Results Comparing Xenogeneic Collagen Matrix and Autogenous Connective Tissue Grafts With Coronally Advanced Flaps for Treatment of Dehiscence-Type Recession Defects.

BACKGROUND
Although connective tissue grafts with coronally advanced flaps (CTG + CAF) have been deemed the gold standard for recession defect treatment, to provide adequate recession coverage, the periodontal profession continues to pursue lower-morbidity, patient-preferred substitutes that are more convenient and of unlimited supply.


METHODS
Using a randomized, controlled, and masked contralateral comparison of matched-pair, within-patient recession defects, collagen matrix (CMX) + CAF therapy was compared with CTG + CAF at 6 months and 5 years. The primary efficacy endpoint was percentage of root coverage (RC). Secondary efficacy parameters included width of keratinized tissue (KTw), probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), clinician rating of color and texture compared with surrounding tissues, and patient esthetic satisfaction.


RESULTS
Seventeen patients were available for the 5-year recall. Mean RC between 6 months and 5 years changed from 89.5% to 77.6% for CMX + CAF test sites and 97.5% to 95.5% for CTG + CAF control sites. KTw averaged >3 mm for both test and control sites at 5 years. PD was equivalent at all time points. The 6-month to 5-year changes for RC, KTw, and PD were not significantly different between therapies. CAL change from 6 months to 5 years was greater for CTG + CAF (0.26 mm) than CMX + CAF (-0.21 mm). Tissue color match to surrounding tissues remained similar for both therapies throughout the study. There was a difference in tissue texture at both 6 months and 5 years, with CMX + CAF sites tending to be "equally firm" and CTG + CAF sites "more firm." Patient satisfaction was high, with no statistical difference in satisfaction between therapies at any time point.


CONCLUSION
When balanced with patient-reported satisfaction, clinical rankings of esthetics, and control and historical RC results reported by other investigators, CMX + CAF appears to present a viable and long-term alternative to traditional CTG + CAF therapy.