COMPARISON OF GUIDED BONE REGENERATION AND SUBEPITHELIAL CONNECTIVE TISSUE GRAFT METHODS FOR THE TREATMENT OF CERVICAL DEFECTS AROUND DENTAL IMPLANTS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

Abstract

Background. The aim of this systematic review was to identify studies on the use of soft-tissue techniques for augmenting peri-implant tissues in cases of horizontal alveolar ridge volume deficiency and for the treatment of peri-implant recessions, and to present and compare their outcomes with those of traditional guided bone regeneration (GBR) methods. Materials and methods. Up to February 2026, three scientific databases were searched (PubMed, Cochrane Library, ResearchGate). The review included randomized controlled trials, comparative studies, and randomized clinical trials with a follow-up period of more than 6 months. The predictor variable was the use of a subepithelial connective tissue graft (sCTG) compared with traditional GBR techniques in dental implantation. The outcome variables were the linear increase (in mm) in soft-tissue height at the buccal contour (BC) and soft-tissue thickness (STT). Results. A total of 5 randomized clinical trials were included (low/unclear risk of bias). Depending on the technique used, the increase in buccal contour (BC) ranged from 0.9±1.9 mm to 1.38±0.72 mm in the GBR groups, and from 1.18 mm (95% CI 0.91–1.45) to 1.7±1.7 mm in the sCTG groups. Soft-tissue thickness (STT) ranged from 1.43±0.68 mm to 5.9±1.6 mm in the GBR group, and from 1.38±1.02 mm to 4.1±1.9 mm in the sCTG group. Conclusion. The use of a subepithelial connective tissue graft provides outcomes for increasing periimplant tissue thickness and height that are not inferior to those of guided bone regeneration. This allows soft-tissue grafting to be considered as an alternative treatment method for minor cervical defects around dental implants.