Received 08.09.2025

DOI: 10.35556/idr-2025-4(113)12-16
Comparative analysis of xenogenic collagen materials for soft tissue augmentation and gingival recession coverage
Melezhechkina I.A., ORCID: 0000-0002-0703-521X
Aliamovskii V.V., ORCID: 0000-0001-6073-2324
Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education “Russian University of Medicine” of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation
127006, Russia, Moscow, Dolgorukovskaya St., 4

E-mail address: iraknopka1@gmail.com

Summary
At present, the choice of material for mucogingival surgery remains an important issue, as the correct selection improves the effectiveness and stability of postoperative outcomes. Although autogenous grafts are considered the gold standard for gingival recession coverage and soft tissue augmentation, they have several drawbacks: limited availability of donor tissue for covering recession, extensive uncontrolled necrosis in the palatal area including the donor site, patient discomfort, and postoperative complications such as painful wounds on the palate, heavy bleeding, postoperative bone exposure, and recurrent herpetic lesions. Due to these significant disadvantages, xenogenic materials have become widely used.
The aim of the study was to conduct a comparative analysis of xenogenic collagen materials for soft tissue augmentation and gingival recession coverage, taking into account their advantages and limitations.
Material and methods. A systematic review and analysis of literature sources was conducted using foreign and domestic databases over the past 10 years, including Medline (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov), the Russian scientific database eLibrary (https://www.elibrary.ru/), and the Cochrane Library (The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CENTRAL, www.thecochranelibrary.com).
Results and discussion. The literature analysis demonstrated that xenogenic collagen membranes possess several advantages over non-resorbable membranes and autogenous grafts. Unlike non-resorbable materials, the use of resorbable collagen membranes eliminates the potential risks associated with prolonged presence of foreign material and the need for a second surgery to remove it. Compared with autogenous grafts, collagen-based materials are associated with reduced postoperative pain and discomfort, and they are not limited by the size of the donor site. Resorbable collagen membranes offer high biocompatibility and potential biological activity, as well as sufficient plasticity, simplicity, and convenience in clinical application.
Conclusion. Currently, the use of resorbable collagen membranes is becoming increasingly widespread and popular. However, further improvements are needed in their properties, particularly in terms of resorption period and stability when exposed in the oral cavity.

Keywords: cross-linked collagen membranes, non-cross-linked collagen membranes, non-resorbable membranes, resorbable collagen membranes, collagen matrices, soft tissue augmentation, gingival recession.

For citation: Melezhechkina I.A., Aliamovskii V.V. Comparative analysis of xenogenic collagen materials for soft tissue augmentation and gingival recession coverage. Stomatology for All / Int. Dental Review. 2025; no. 4 (113): 12–16 (in Russian). doi: 10.35556/idr-2025-4(113)12-16

References
1. Bottino M.C., Thomas V. Membranes for Periodontal Regeneration – A Materials Perspective. Front Oral Biol. 2015; no. 17: 90–100. doi: 10.1159/000381699
2. Siaili M., Chatzopoulou D., Gillam D.G. An overview of periodontal regenerative procedures for the general dental practitioner. Saudi Dent J. 2018; no. 30 (1): 26–37. doi: 10.1016/j. sdentj.2017.11.001
3. Camps-Font O., Martin-Fatas P., Cle-Ovejero A., Figueiredo R., Gay-Escoda C., Valmaseda-Castellon E. Postoperative infections after dental implant placement: Variables associated with increased risk of failure. J Periodontol. 2018; no. 89 (10): 1165–1173. doi: 10.1002/JPER.18-0024
4. Iviglia G., Kargozar S., Baino F. Biomaterials, Current Strategies, and Novel Nano-Technological Approaches for Periodontal Regeneration. Journal of functional biomaterials. 2019; no. 10 (1): 3 pp. doi: 10.3390/jfb10010003
5. Soldatos N.K., Stylianou P., Koidou V.P., Angelov N., Yukna R., Romanos G.E. Limitations and options using resorbable versus nonresorbable membranes for successful guided bone regeneration. Quintessence international. 2017; no. 48 (2): 131–147. doi: 10.3290/j. qi.a37133
6. Rotundo R., Pini-Prato G. Use of a new collagen matrix (Mucograft) for the treatment of multiple gingival recessions: case reports. The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry. 2012; no. 32 (4): 413–419.
7. Sanz M., Lorenzo R., Aranda J.J., 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. Journal of clinical periodontology. 2009; no. 36 (10): 868–876.
8. Bunyaratavej P., Wang H.L. Collagen membranes: a review. Journal of periodontology. 2001; no. 72 (2): 215−229. doi: 10.1902/jop.2001.72.2.215
9. Khan R., Khan M., Bey A. Use of collagen as an implantable material in the reconstructive procedures: An overview. Biology and Medicine. 2011; no. 3 (4): 25−32.
10. Tal H., Kozlovsky A., Artzi Z., Nemcovsky C.E., Moses O. Long-term bio-degradation of cross-linked and non-cross-linked collagen barriers in human guided bone regeneration. Clinical oral implants research. 2008; no. 19 (3): 295−302. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01424.x
11. Moses O., Pitaru S., Artzi Z., Nemcovsky C. Healing of dehiscence type defects in implants places together with different barrier membranes: A comarative clinical study. Clinical oral implants research. 2005; no. 16 (2): 210−219. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01100.x
12. Allan B., Ruan R., Landao-Bassonga E., Gillman N., Wang T., Gao J. et al. Collagen Membrane for Guided Bone Regeneration in Dental and Orthopedic Applications. Tissue engineering. Part A. 2021; no. 27 (5–6): 372–381. doi: 10.1089/ten.TEA.2020.0140
13. Lee J–S., Mitulovic G., Panahipour L., Gruber R. Proteomic Analysis of Porcine-Derived Collagen Membrane and Matrix. Materials. 2020; no. 13 (22): 5187. doi: 10.3390/ma13225187
14. Elgali I., Omar O., Dahlin C., Thomsen P. Guided bone regeneration: materials and biological mechanisms revisited. European journal of oral sciences. 2017; no. 125 (5): 315–337. doi: 10.1111/eos.12364
15. Chekanova A.A., Selsky N.E., Kovtun O.P., Shimova M.E. Modern aspects and clinical perspectives of changing the biotype of the mucous membrane in the projection of the dental implant (based on a literature review). Stomatology for All / Int. Dental Review. 2024; no. 3 (108): 46–51 (in Russian). doi: 10.35556/idr-2024-3(108)46-51
16. Chiapasco M., Casentini P. Horizontal bone-augmentation procedures in implant dentistry: prosthetically guided regeneration. Periodontology 2000. 2018; no. 77 (1): 213–240. doi: 10.1111/ prd.12219
17. Garcia J., Dodge A., Luepke P., Wang H-L, Kapila Y., Lin G-H. Effect of membrane exposure on guided bone regeneration: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical oral implants research. 2018; no. 29 (3): 328–338. doi: 10.1111/clr.13121
18. Jimenez Garcia J., Berghezan S., Carames J.M.M., Dard M.M., Marques D.N.S. Effect of cross-linked vs non-cross-linked collagen membranes on bone: A systematic review. Journal of periodontal research. 2017; no. 52 (6): 955–964. doi: 10.1111/jre.12470
19. Dimitriou R., Mataliotakis G.I., Calori G.M., Giannoudis P.V. The role of barrier membranes for guided bone regeneration and restoration of large bone defects: current experimental and clinical evidence. BMC medicine. 2012; no. 10: 81 p. doi: 10.1186/1741-7015-10-81
20. Khojasteh A., Kheiri L., Motamedian S.R., Khoshkam V. Guided Bone Regeneration for the Reconstruction of Alveolar Bone Defects. Annals of maxillofacial surgery. 2017; no. 7 (2): 263–277. doi: 10.4103/ams. ams_76_17
21. Sheikh Z., Qureshi J., Alshahrani A.M., Nassar H., Ikeda Y., Glogauer M., Ganss B. Collagen based barrier membranes for periodontal guided bone regeneration applications. Odontology / the Society of the Nippon Dental University. 2017; no. 105 (1): 1–12. doi: 10.1007/s10266-016-0267-0
22. Al-Maawi S., Herrera-Vizcaino C., Orlowska A., Willershausen I., Sader R., Miron R.J. et al. Biologization of Collagen-Based Biomaterials Using Liquid-Platelet-Rich Fibrin: New Insights into Clinically Applicable Tissue Engineering. Materials (Basel). 2019; no. 12 (23): 3993. doi: 10.3390/ma12233993
23. Rothamel D., Schwarz F., Sager M., Herten M., Sculean A., Becker J. Biodegradation of differently cross-linked collagen membranes. An experimental study in the rat. Clinical Oral Implants Research. 2005; no. 16: 369–378. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01108.x
24. Miron R.J., Zohdi H., Fujioka-Kobayashi M., Bosshardt D.D. Giant cells around bone biomaterials: Osteoclasts or multi-nucleated giant cells? Acta Biomater. 2016; no. 46: 15–28. doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2016.09.029
25. Rothamel D., Benner M., Fienitz T., Happe A., Kreppel M., Nickenig H.J., Zoller J.E. Biodegradation pattern and tissue integration of native and cross-linked porcine collagen soft tissue augmentation matrices – an experimental study in the rat. Head Face Med. 2014; no. 10: 10 pp. doi: 10.1186/1746-160X-10-10
26. Sela M.N., Babitski E., Steinberg D., Kohavi D., Rosen G. Degradation of collagen-guided tissue regeneration membranes by proteolytic enzymes of Porphyromonas gingivalis and its inhibition by antibacterial agents. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009; no. 20 (5): 496–502. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01678.x
27. Schwarz F., Rothamel D., Herten M., Sager M., Becker J. Angiogenesis pattern of native and cross-linked collagen membranes: an immunohistochemical study in the rat. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2006; no. 17 (4): 403–409. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01225.x
28. Rothamel D., Schwarz F., Fienitz T., Smeets R., Dreiseidler T., Ritter L., Happe A., Zoller J. Biocompatibility and biodegradation of a native porcine pericardium membrane: results of in vitro and in vivo examinations. The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants. 2012; no. 27 (1): 146–154.
29. Ayari H. The use of periodontal membranes in the field of periodontology: spotlight on collagen membranes. Journal of applied biomedicine. 2022; no. 20 (4): 154–162. doi: 10.32725/jab.2022.020