In conclusion , follow-up time ( < or > 2 years ) and the risk of bias influence the results of treatment with EMDP in IPD
Previous systematic review s have demonstrated better results with enamel matrix derivative proteins ( EMDP ) as compared with open flap debridement ( OFD ) for the management of infrabony periodontal defects ( IPD ) .
The aim of this study was to determine whether these differences vary according to the follow-up and quality of the studies .
Microsurgical access flap in conjunction with enamel matrix derivative for the treatment of intra-bony defects: a controlled clinical trial.
OBJECTIVES The aims of this controlled study were to clinical ly and radiographically evaluate the effect of a microsurgical approach for the treatment of intra-bony defects with and without an enamel matrix derivative ( EMD ) . Parts of this study population were already published by Wachtel and colleagues in 2003 . MATERIAL AND METHODS Seventy intra-bony defects were r and omly assigned to a microsurgical access flap with application of EMD ( test group ) and on the contra-lateral side to a microsurgical access flap alone ( control group ) . Clinical and radiographic parameters were assessed at baseline and after 6 and 12 months . RESULTS Both test and control treatments result ed in a statistically significant mean clinical attachment level ( CAL ) gain , probing pocket depth ( PPD ) reduction and radiographic bone fill . The test group yielded statistically significantly more CAL gain , PPD reduction and radiographic bone fill than the control group . Gingival recession increase after 12 months averaged 0.5 and 0.7 mm for the test and control groups , and did not reach statistical significance . Two weeks after surgery , primary wound closure was maintained in 91 % of the test sites and 97 % of the control sites . CONCLUSION The combination of a microsurgical access flap with EMD seems to be superior to open flap debridement in terms of PPD reduction , CAL gain and radiographic bone fill . In the test as well as the control group , primary wound closure was successfully achieved
In conclusion , follow-up time ( < or > 2 years ) and the risk of bias influence the results of treatment with EMDP in IPD
Previous systematic review s have demonstrated better results with enamel matrix derivative proteins ( EMDP ) as compared with open flap debridement ( OFD ) for the management of infrabony periodontal defects ( IPD ) .
The aim of this study was to determine whether these differences vary according to the follow-up and quality of the studies .