4.5 Article

Comparative study of DFDBA in combination with enamel matrix derivative versus DFDBA alone for treatment of periodontal intrabony defects at 12 months post-surgery

Journal

CLINICAL ORAL INVESTIGATIONS
Volume 15, Issue 2, Pages 225-232

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-009-0369-y

Keywords

DFDBA; EMD; Bone grafts; Osseous defects; Periodontal regeneration; Periodontitis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this randomized double-blind, clinical trial was to compare the use of enamel matrix derivative (EMD) and demineralised freeze-dried bone allografts (DFDBA) with DFDBA alone for the treatment of human periodontal intrabony defects at 12 months post-surgery. Fifty-six intrabony osseous defects in 56 periodontis patients were randomly assigned to the test group (DFDBA + EMD) or the control group (DFDBA) for periodontal treatment. Clinical and radiographic measurements were made at the baseline and after 12 months. Compared to baseline, the 12-month results indicated that both treatment modalities resulted in significant changes in all clinical parameters (gingival index, bleeding on probing, probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), gingival recession; P < 0.05) and radiographic parameters (hard tissue fill (HTF) and bone depth reduction; P < 0.05). Furthermore, statistically significant differences were found in the test group compared to the control group in PD reduction (5.0 mm vs. 4.0 mm; P < 0.05), CAL gain (4.0 mm vs. 3.25 mm), and HTF (4.0 mm vs. 3.5 mm; P < 0.05). In the test group, 25% of sites gained > 4 mm of CAL, while in the control group, 7.1% of sites gained > 4 mm of CAL. Both treatments showed a good soft and hard periodontal tissue response. At 12 months post-surgery, the combined use of DFDBA and EMD seemed to produce a statistically significant improvement of PD reduction, CAL gain, and HTF.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available