4.6 Article

Treatment of intrabony periodontal defects using rhFGF-2 in combination with deproteinized bovine bone mineral or rhFGF-2 alone: A 6-month randomized controlled trial

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY
Volume 46, Issue 3, Pages 332-341

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.13086

Keywords

bone graft; deproteinized bovine bone mineral; FGF-2; patient-reported outcome; periodontal regeneration; periodontitis

Funding

  1. Osteology Foundation [17-136]
  2. Multidisciplinary Research Center for Jawbone Disease (MRCJD), Tokyo Dental College (a MEXT Private University Research Branding Project)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim To evaluate the use of recombinant human fibroblast growth factor (rhFGF)-2 in combination with deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) compared with rhFGF-2 alone, in the treatment of intrabony periodontal defects. Materials and Methods Patients with periodontitis who had received initial periodontal therapy and had intrabony defects of >= 3 mm in depth were enrolled. Sites were randomly assigned to receive a commercial formulation of 0.3% rhFGF-2 + DBBM (test) or rhFGF-2 alone (control). Clinical parameters and a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) were evaluated at baseline and at 3 and 6 months postoperatively. Results Twenty-two sites in each group were evaluated. A significant improvement in clinical attachment level (CAL) from baseline was observed in both groups at 6 months postoperatively. CAL gain was 3.16 +/- 1.45 mm in the test group and 2.77 +/- 1.15 mm in the control group, showing no significant difference between groups. Radiographic bone fill was significantly greater in the test group (47.2%) than in the control group (29.3%). No significant difference in PROM between groups was observed. Conclusions At 6 months, no significant difference in CAL gain or PROM between the two treatments was observed, although combination therapy yielded an enhanced radiographic outcome.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available