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 .
Platelet-rich plasma combined with a porous hydroxyapatite graft for the treatment of intrabony periodontal defects in humans: a comparative controlled clinical study.
BACKGROUND The aim of the present controlled clinical study was to compare platelet-rich plasma ( PRP ) combined with a biodegradable ceramic , porous hydroxyapatite ( HA ) with a mixture of HA and saline in the treatment of human intrabony defects . METHODS Seventy interproximal intrabony osseous defects in 70 healthy , non-smoking subjects diagnosed with chronic periodontitis were included in this study . Thirty-five subjects each were r and omly assigned to either the test group ( PRP and HA ) or control group ( HA with saline ) . Clinical and radiographic measurements were determined at baseline and the 12-month evaluation . RESULTS When compared to baseline , the 12-month results indicated that , while both treatment modalities result ed in significant changes in all clinical parameters ( gingival index , bleeding on probing , probing depth , clinical attachment level , and intrabony defect fill ; P < 0.001 ) , the test group exhibited statistically significant changes compared to the control sites in probing depth reduction : 4.7 + /- 1.6 mm versus 3.7 + /- 2.0 mm ( P < 0.05 ) ; clinical attachment gain : 3.4 + /- 1.7 mm versus 2.0 + /- 1.2 mm ( P < 0.001 ) ; and vertical relative attachment gain : 70.3 % + /- 23.4 % versus 45.5 % + /- 29.4 % ( P < 0.001 ) . CONCLUSION Treatment with a combination of PRP and HA compared to HA with saline led to a significantly more favorable clinical improvement in intrabony periodontal defects
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 .