Journal of clinical periodontology · 2025
Effect of Tooth Splinting on Clinical Outcomes following Periodontal Regenerative Therapy in Teeth with Mobility Degree 1 or 0: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Mikami Risako, Ishimaru Miho, Mizutani Koji, Shioyama Hidehiro, Matsuura Takanori, Aoyama Norio, Suda Tomonari, Kusunoki Yukako, Takeda Kohei, Anzai Tatsuhiko, Takahashi Kunihiko, Matsuo Koichiro, Aida Jun, Izumi Yuichi, Aoki Akira, Iwata Takanori
Аннотация
AIM: The evidence for tooth splinting during periodontal regenerative therapy is limited. We aimed to investigate the adjunctive benefits of tooth splinting on clinical outcomes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In total, 194 intrabony defects in 126 participants were prospectively evaluated over three years following periodontal regenerative therapy with an enamel matrix derivative. Clinical attachment level (CAL), probing depth (PD) and radiographic bone defect depth (RBD) were assessed. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to assign surgical sites to splinting and non-splinting groups, and multilevel regression was used to analyse the impact of tooth splinting on clinical outcomes.
RESULTS: Using PSM, 37 sites each from 32 and 30 participants in the splinting and non-splinting groups, respectively, were matched using the propensity score. Both groups included 26 and 11 sites with tooth mobility degrees 0 and 1, respectively. Significant improvements in CAL, PD and RBD were observed in both groups compared to baseline over the 3-year period. However, there were no significant differences among these parameters between the groups at the 1- and 3-year follow-ups.
CONCLUSION: No statistically significant adjunctive benefits of tooth splinting were observed in this study. However, further research with a larger sample size may be required to detect smaller but potentially clinically relevant effects.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In total, 194 intrabony defects in 126 participants were prospectively evaluated over three years following periodontal regenerative therapy with an enamel matrix derivative. Clinical attachment level (CAL), probing depth (PD) and radiographic bone defect depth (RBD) were assessed. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to assign surgical sites to splinting and non-splinting groups, and multilevel regression was used to analyse the impact of tooth splinting on clinical outcomes.
RESULTS: Using PSM, 37 sites each from 32 and 30 participants in the splinting and non-splinting groups, respectively, were matched using the propensity score. Both groups included 26 and 11 sites with tooth mobility degrees 0 and 1, respectively. Significant improvements in CAL, PD and RBD were observed in both groups compared to baseline over the 3-year period. However, there were no significant differences among these parameters between the groups at the 1- and 3-year follow-ups.
CONCLUSION: No statistically significant adjunctive benefits of tooth splinting were observed in this study. However, further research with a larger sample size may be required to detect smaller but potentially clinically relevant effects.