MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1902/jop.2002.73.4.409

Медицинская библиотека · Journal of periodontology · 2002

Comparison of clinical, radiographic, and histometric measurements following treatment with guided tissue regeneration or enamel matrix proteins in human periodontal defects.

Windisch Péter, Sculean Anton, Klein Filip, Tóth Vilmos, Gera István, Reich Elmar, Eickholz Peter

Клиническое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiographic parameters with the histometric findings following 2 different regenerative procedures in humans.

METHODS

Fourteen advanced intrabony defects at teeth scheduled for extraction were randomly treated as follows: 8 with guided tissue regeneration (GTR) using bioabsorbable barriers and 6 with an enamel matrix protein derivative (EMD). Standardized radiographs, probing depths (PD), and attachment levels (CAL) at baseline and 6 months after therapy were evaluated and compared to the histometric measurements made following the removal of teeth and surrounding tissues 6 months after the surgery.

RESULTS

Significant PD reductions (GTR: -5.62 mm; EMD: -5.00 mm) and CAL gains (GTR: 3.87 mm; EMD: 2.67 mm) were observed in both groups. Six months after surgery, minor resorptions of the alveolar crest (AC) (GTR: 0.40 mm; EMD: 0.33 mm) and bony gain at the bottom of the defects (GTR: 0.47 mm; EMD: 1.05 mm) were observed radiographically. No statistically significant differences in the change of clinical and radiographic parameters between the GTR and EMD groups were found. Histometrically, significant amounts of new connective tissue attachment (i.e., cementum with inserting collagen fibers) were observed in both groups (GTR: 2.29 mm; EMD: 1.81 mm). Bone regeneration was found to be significant only in the GTR group (GTR: 1.93 mm; EMD: 0.78 mm). However, the study lacked statistical power for determining equivalence between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of the present study, it may be concluded that at 6 months after GTR or enamel matrix protein derivative therapy, formation of new cementum and bone may be histometrically demonstrated. Except for the formation of new bone, no statistically significant differences between both therapies could be seen for clinical, radiographic, and histometric results 6 months after surgery.

Для цитирования: Windisch Péter, Sculean Anton, Klein Filip, Tóth Vilmos, Gera István, Reich Elmar, Eickholz Peter. Comparison of clinical, radiographic, and histometric measurements following treatment with guided tissue regeneration or enamel matrix proteins in human periodontal defects.. Journal of periodontology. 2002. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2002.73.4.409.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.