In most respects , all membranes and enamel matrix derivative ( EMD ) delivered better outcomes , in the range of 1 to 2 mm , than open flap debridement .
The use of any barrier type or EMD configuration was found to yield more Clinical Attachment Level ( CAL ) gain than any open flap configuration .
GTR was confirmed to be superior to open flap debridement
In a 1998 review article , Laurell and colleagues performed a meta- analysis of relevant guided tissue regeneration ( GTR ) articles over the previous 20 years ( 1 ) .
The purpose of the present research was to exp and on that work , particularly search ing for trends discriminating between bioabsorbable and non-bioabsorbable barriers , as well as the use of enamel matrix derivative , with respect to interproximal bony defects .
Factors affecting the healing response of intrabony defects following guided tissue regeneration and access flap surgery.
Identification and control of significant factors determining clinical outcomes is of paramount importance to improve expected results of a variety of therapeutic procedures . The aim of this investigation was to identify , with a multivariate approach , factors associated with healing outcomes of 3 periodontal surgical procedures in deep intrabony defects . 45 patients with evidence of deep intrabony defects were r and omly assigned to 3 treatment groups : access flap ( group C ) , conventional guided tissue regeneration ( GTR ) with non-resorbable exp and ed polytetrafluoroethilene ( ePTFE ) membranes ( group B ) , and GTR with self supporting membranes combined with the modified papilla preservation technique ( group A ) . In both GTR procedures , membranes were positioned coronal to the interproxymal alveolar crest . Primary outcome variables ( i.e. , probing attachment level gains at 1 year and the amount of newly formed tissue present at membrane removal ) were explained in terms of a series of patient , defect morphology and surgical factors , using a multivariate approach . Highly significant treatment effects were observed , indicating that the 3 tested therapeutic modalities result ed in significant differences in primary outcome variables . Detailed analysis assessing the significance of the tested factors in determining the healing outcomes following each procedure was performed with a stepwise elimination approach of non-significant factors . The results indicated that : ( i ) the need to create and maintain space should be a key objective of regenerative approaches based upon the principles of guided tissue regeneration ; ( ii ) control of patient 's oral hygiene and residual periodontal infection in the oral cavity are strongly associated with clinical outcomes of both regenerative and conventional surgical procedures and should receive proper attention
In most respects , all membranes and enamel matrix derivative ( EMD ) delivered better outcomes , in the range of 1 to 2 mm , than open flap debridement .
The use of any barrier type or EMD configuration was found to yield more Clinical Attachment Level ( CAL ) gain than any open flap configuration .
GTR was confirmed to be superior to open flap debridement
In a 1998 review article , Laurell and colleagues performed a meta- analysis of relevant guided tissue regeneration ( GTR ) articles over the previous 20 years ( 1 ) .
The purpose of the present research was to exp and on that work , particularly search ing for trends discriminating between bioabsorbable and non-bioabsorbable barriers , as well as the use of enamel matrix derivative , with respect to interproximal bony defects .