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 .
Five years clinical results following treatment of human intra-bony defects with an enamel matrix derivative: A randomized controlled trial
Abstract Introduction . Emdogain ® represents an extracellular matrix derivative that controls and promotes periodontal regeneration . Several studies have demonstrated that the treatment of periodontal defects with Emdogain ® leads to improvements in clinical parameters . However , long-time clinical trials establishing clinical usefulness of Emdogain ® are scarce . Therefore , the present r and omized split mouth , controlled study was undertaken to evaluate the effectiveness of Emdogain ® as an adjunct to open flap debridement for the treatment of intra-bony defects over a period of 5 years . Material s and methods . The study population consisted of 15 chronic periodontitis patients with bilateral interproximal osseous defects . The test group was treated by open flap debridement with EDTA 24 % ( PrefGel ® ) followed by enamel matrix derivative ( Emdogain ® ) . The control group was treated by open flap debridement with EDTA 24 % ( PrefGel ® ) . Results . After 1 and 5 years , both the test and control groups showed significant mean PPD reduction . A greater reduction in mean Probing Pocket Depth ( PPD ) was observed in the test group ( 3.84 ± 1.05 ) as compared to the control group ( 1.92 ± 0.35 ) . The mean Clinical Attachment Level ( CAL ) gain of 3.18 ± 0.87 mm was observed in the test group , while the control group displayed mean CAL gain of 1.60 ± 0.54 mm . The observed differences were found to be statistically significant in both the groups ( p < 0.05 ) . Percentage bone fill was significantly increased at 12 months post-surgery in test group ( 66.66 ± 7.8 % ) as compared to control group ( 31.71 ± 4.1 % ) . Conclusion . The treatment with Emdogain result ed in a significantly higher CAL gain and PPD reduction in comparison with OFD and PrefGel ®
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 .