Efficacy of Collagen Matrix for Peri-implant Soft Tissue Phenotype Modification
NCT ID: NCT07056959
Last Updated: 2025-12-04
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
RECRUITING
NA
30 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2025-11-01
2028-06-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Thirty participants will be recruited at Dubai Health Dental Hospital and randomly assigned to receive either XCM (test) or FGG (control) augmentation. Clinical assessments will be conducted at baseline (T0), 2 weeks (T2w), and at 1 (T1), 3 (T3), 6 (T6), 12 (T12), and 24 (T24) months post-surgery.
The primary outcome is the change in KM width, measured from the mucosal margin to the mucogingival junction. Secondary outcomes include KM thickness, supracrestal tissue height, and soft tissue dimensional changes, assessed using intraoral scans (Trios 5) and superimposed STL files. Additional measurements include peri-implant soft tissue level and phenotype.
PROMs will be recorded in the first postoperative week and at the 3-year mark using a visual analog scale (VAS). Clinical indices such as plaque index, bleeding index, and probing depth will be evaluated at 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years. Marginal bone level changes and implant survival rates will also be tracked throughout the study period.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Injectable Platelet Rich Fibrin With Collagen Matrix in Treatment of Multiple Gingival Recession.
NCT05389059
Soft Tissue Augmentation Around Dental Implant
NCT06238427
Assessment of Hard and Soft Tissue Changes Following XCM Versus FGG Simultaneous With Delayed Dental Implant Placement
NCT07080177
Xenogenic Collagen Matrix vs. Connective Tissue Graft for Soft Tissue Augmentation Around Early Maxillary Implants
NCT07024186
Clinical and Histological Outcomes of Using Collagen Matrix or Soft Tissue Graft Around Implants
NCT05123898
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Soft tissue augmentation procedures are often implemented to improve the peri-implant soft tissue phenotype, namely the KM width, KM thickness, and supracrestal tissue height. Similar to natural teeth, soft tissue augmentation methods around implants have included autogenous techniques such as bilaminar- or apically positioned flap (APF) either alone or in combination with free gingival grafts (FGG), and connective tissue grafts (CTG). These approaches have demonstrated favourable medium to long term outcomes. Although autogenous grafts are still considered the gold standard for soft tissue augmentation procedures, a secondary interventional site for graft harvesting increases patients' morbidity. Additional intra and postoperative complications such as palatal bleeding, edema, infection, and sometimes necrosis has also been identified. Moreover, postoperative pain perception following palatal graft harvesting worsened and required additional treatment of the wound site to minimize discomfort and the need for analgesics. Additionally, the effectiveness of soft tissue augmentation may be limited by the availability of connective tissue at the donor site, particularly in cases requiring augmentation for deep horizontal alveolar defects or extensive edentulous gaps. To overcome these shortcomings, acellular dermal matrix (ADM) or xenogeneic collagen matrix (XCM) have been developed that may be associated with reduced pain perception, reduced surgery time, as they do not require an additional surgical site. While short term primary outcomes of achieving adequate zone of KM using these soft tissue substitutes have been comparable to those achieved with autogenous grafts, the efficacy of soft tissue augmentation procedures aimed at modifying the peri-implant soft tissue phenotype and their impact on peri-implant health have remained inconclusive . The network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials demonstrated that bilaminar approaches involving CTG or ADM obtained the highest amount of KM gain, whereas APF in combination with FGG was the most effective technique for increasing KM width. KM augmentation via APF alone was associated with a significant reduction in peri-implant parameters like probing depths and plaque index, regardless of the soft tissue grafting material used, whereas bilaminar techniques with CTG or XCM showed beneficial effects on marginal bone level stability. The non-inferiority of XCM as compared to CTG or ADM have also been evaluated in various multi-center randomized controlled trials. Soft tissue augmentation with a cross-linked porcine-derived XCM at the time of implant placement showed substantial shrinkage of about 75% in areas between augmentation and 1-year follow-up. Overall, while 25% of the original soft tissue defect was eliminated by augmentation, XCM was deemed safe with no postoperative complications and limited marginal bone loss . Also, there is no consensus comparing the effectiveness of autogenous grafts and soft-tissue substitutes in achieving a stable, non-mobile peri-implant mucosa, which should be a key objective of these surgical procedures . Furthermore, there is no evidence regarding patient's preferences, studies assessing aesthetic outcomes have shown that soft tissue substitutes tend to deliver better results than FGG. However, no significant differences were observed when compared to CTG.
The timing of soft tissue augmentation around implants is a crucial factor, that may influence the choice of graft material, based on type of defect, quality and quantity of residual soft tissue and clinician's preference. The procedure is commonly performed before or at the time of implant placement, at the time of healing abutment connection or after final restorative phase. Soft tissue augmentation prior to implant placement or at healing abutment connection are considered the gold standard time points, due to the possibility of achieving complete coverage of the graft material through adequate tissue handling. Conversely, augmentation procedures at the time of implant placement or after crown delivery appears to be less predictable due to the different healing approaches and the unexpected shrinkage that may occur.
While the effectiveness of the XCM (Mucograft©, Geistlich Pharma® AG, Wolhusen, Switzerland) as a substitute for FGG around implants has been confirmed, its impact on peri-implant soft tissue phenotype modification when placed at the time of healing abutment connection requires further validation.
The aim of this randomized clinical trial is to evaluate clinical efficacy and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of XCM compared to FGG for phenotype modification when conducted at time of healing abutment connection around dental implants over a short -term (6 months) and a long term (1- and 2- years) follow-up.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Test group - Mucograft
XCM (Mucograft©, Geistlich Pharma® AG, Wolhusen, Switzerland) when placed at the time of healing abutment connection and its impact on peri-implant soft tissue phenotype modification
Soft tissue substitute for peri-implant phenotype modification
XCM (Mucograft©, Geistlich Pharma® AG, Wolhusen, Switzerland) placed at the time of healing abutment connection and its impact on peri-implant soft tissue phenotype modification when
Control Group - Free gingival graft
Use of Free gingival graft placed at the time of healing abutment connection and its impact on peri-implant soft tissue phenotype modification
Control Group - Free gingival graft for soft tissue augmentation
Free gingival graft around implants placed at the time of healing abutment connection and its impact on peri-implant soft tissue phenotype modification
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Soft tissue substitute for peri-implant phenotype modification
XCM (Mucograft©, Geistlich Pharma® AG, Wolhusen, Switzerland) placed at the time of healing abutment connection and its impact on peri-implant soft tissue phenotype modification when
Control Group - Free gingival graft for soft tissue augmentation
Free gingival graft around implants placed at the time of healing abutment connection and its impact on peri-implant soft tissue phenotype modification
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Insufficient KM width (\< 2 mm) at the buccal aspect of implants at time of healing abutment placement, either for single anterior or posterior implants.
* Controlled oral hygiene (full-mouth plaque and bleeding scores ≤ 25% at baseline).
* Good compliance and commitment to attend follow-up review appointments.
* Willing to provide informed consent.
Exclusion Criteria
* Untreated localized or generalized periodontal diseases
* Uncontrolled systemic diseases
* Long term use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications
* History of malignancy, radiotherapy or chemotherapy
* Collagen allergy
* History of mucogingival surgery
21 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Maanas Shah
Assistant Professor
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Dubai Dental Hospital
Dubai, , United Arab Emirates
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Sanz M, Lorenzo R, Aranda JJ, Martin C, Orsini M. Clinical evaluation of a new collagen matrix (Mucograft prototype) to enhance the width of keratinized tissue in patients with fixed prosthetic restorations: a randomized prospective clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol. 2009 Oct;36(10):868-76. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2009.01460.x. Epub 2009 Aug 12.
Naenni N, Bienz SP, Benic GI, Jung RE, Hammerle CHF, Thoma DS. Volumetric and linear changes at dental implants following grafting with volume-stable three-dimensional collagen matrices or autogenous connective tissue grafts: 6-month data. Clin Oral Investig. 2018 Apr;22(3):1185-1195. doi: 10.1007/s00784-017-2210-3. Epub 2017 Sep 18.
Cosyn J, Eeckhout C, De Bruyckere T, Eghbali A, Vervaeke S, Younes F, Christiaens V. A multi-centre randomized controlled trial comparing connective tissue graft with collagen matrix to increase soft tissue thickness at the buccal aspect of single implants: 1-year results. J Clin Periodontol. 2022 Sep;49(9):911-921. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.13691. Epub 2022 Jul 20.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
MBRU-HBMCDM-RG2025-02
Identifier Type: OTHER_GRANT
Identifier Source: secondary_id
MBRU-HBMCDM-RG2025-02
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.