Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical effectiveness of using a combination of enamel matrix protein derivative and acellular dermal matrix in comparison to acellular dermal matrix alone for treating gingival recessions.
Methods: The Cochrane Library (Wiley), PubMed by Medline (NLM), Medline (EBSCO), and Embase (Ovid) databases were searched for entries up to April 2020. Only clinical trials were included. Primary outcomes were root coverage (%), changes in keratinized tissue width and recession (mm). Meta-analysis was conducted for root coverage, changes in keratinized tissue width, recession, clinical attachment level and probing depth.
Results: Four studies were selected for the analysis. In primary outcomes, root coverage, change in keratinized tissue width and recession analysis showed a mean difference of 4.99% (p = 0.11), 0.20 mm (p = 0.14) and 0.13 mm (p = 0.23) respectively between the two groups. Secondary outcomes analysis also exhibited a statistically insignificant difference between the test and control group with mean difference of 0.11 mm (p = 0.32) in clinical attachment level gain and -0.03 mm (p = 0.29) in probing depth reduction analysis.
Conclusions: Within the limits of this study, enamel matrix protein derivative combined with acellular dermal matrix used for treating gingival recession defects resulted in no beneficial effect clinically than acellular dermal matrix only.
Keywords: acellular dermal matrix; alveolar bone; enamel proteome; periodontal regeneration; systematic review.