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 .
Clinical Evaluation of an Allogeneic Bone Matrix in the Treatment of Periodontal Osseous Defects.
The objective of this study was to evaluate an allogeneic bone matrix ( ABM ) as a graft material for the treatment of periodontal osseous defects .  ABM is allogeneic demineralized freeze-dried human bone which has been processed to eliminate contaminating lipids , serum proteins , and cellular components which , when present , have the potential to reduce the osteoinductive capacity of the graft . ABM is provided in a glycerine delivery suspension which enhances graft stability and ease in placement . Paired osseous defects , ranging in depth from 3 to 12 mm , within 11 patients , were r and omized to receive ABM or demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft ( DFDBA ) .  Probing depth , clinical attachment level , bone fill , and defect resolution were determined at baseline and at the 6-month re-entry procedure . St and ardized radiographs and computer-assisted densitometric image analysis ( CADIA ) were used to assess bone density changes . Complete bone defect resolution was seen in 7 of 11 defects receiving ABM , and in 5 of 11 defects with the use of DFDBA . Mean defect fill with  ABM  was 69 % ( 33 to 100 % ) compared to 77 % ( 66 to 100 % ) with DFDBA . Soft tissue healing without clinical evidence of tissue reaction to ABM was observed . ABM and DFDBA sites exhibited similar probing depth reduction of 4.0 and 4.6 mm , respectively . In sites with initial probing depth of 7 mm or more , probing depths were reduced a mean of 5.8 mm with ABM and 6.7 mm with DFDBA ; both grafts result ed in a mean 4 mm of attachment gain . Results of radiographic analysis suggest similar density changes with each graft . These results demonstrate that both treatments were effective and that ABM may be a useful graft material in the treatment of periodontal osseous defects . J Periodontol 1995;66:1074 - 1079
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 .