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 .
Evaluation of demineralized bone matrix paste and putty in periodontal intraosseous defects.
BACKGROUND Demineralized bone matrix ( DBX ) paste and putty are particulate demineralized bone matrices in a 2 % or 4 % hyaluronate carrier , respectively . The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of DBX paste and putty compared to demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft ( DFDBA ) in the treatment of human intraosseous periodontal defects . METHODS Sixty systemically healthy individuals between the ages of 31 and 71 years with at least one intraosseous periodontal defect of > or = 3 mm in depth and radiographic evidence of at least 40 % to 50 % vertical bone loss were accrued . Following initial non-surgical periodontal therapy , sites were r and omly selected to receive either DBX paste , DBX putty , or DFDBA ( control ) . Baseline and 6-month reentry soft and hard tissue parameter measurements were made by calibrated examiners . Data were analyzed within and between groups utilizing analysis of variance ( ANOVA ) and paired and unpaired Student t tests . RESULTS Probing depth reductions were significantly improved in all treatment groups with DFDBA , DBX paste , and putty patients demonstrating 2.8 mm , 3.6 mm , and 2.3 mm , respectively . Attachment level gains were significantly improved from baseline for all treatment groups with DFDBA , DBX paste , and putty , respectively , demonstrating 2.4 mm , 2.9 mm , and 1.6 mm . Bone fill was similar between all groups with DBX paste , putty , and DFDBA control groups demonstrating 2.0 mm , 2.4 mm , and 2.2 mm , respectively . All groups yielded significant improvements in percent bone fill with DFDBA , DBX paste and putty , respectively , achieving 37 % , 42.1 % , and 50 % with no significant differences between the groups . CONCLUSION In summary , demineralized bone matrix paste , demineralized bone matrix putty , and demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft all demonstrated similar favorable improvements in soft and hard tissue parameters in the treatment of human intraosseous 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 .