Comparison of Minimally Invasive and Conventional Flap Surgery for Treatment of Intrabony Periodontal Defects: A Pilot Case Controlled Study

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcome of conventional flap surgery and minimally invasive surgery for the regenerative treatment of periodontal intrabony defects in a prospective, case-controlled study design. For this purpose, nine healthy individuals with 15 periodontal intrabony defects were included in the study. Patients were randomly assigned to undergo either minimally invasive surgery or conventional flap surgery for treatment of their intrabony periodontal defect. Each patient had preoperative and postoperative X-ray and measurement of periodontal parameters by a blinded examiner. All bony defects were treated with allograft consisting of enamel matrix derivative and demineralized freeze-dried bone. Results of this study indicated that both minimally invasive and conventional flap surgery improved pocket depth and clinical attachment levels after 6 months of surgery with no significant difference between the two surgeries. The overall result of our study suggests that minimally invasive surgery is as effective as conventional flap surgery in the treatment of intrabony periodontal defects and that both techniques appear to provide a comparable outcome.

The Role of Oral Fusobacterium nucleatum in Female Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…Several flap surgical designs have been proposed with modifications to minimise periodontal surgical trauma (PST); however, the traditional method to access flap surgery (2 flap reflections of buccal and lingual/palatal) remains the advocated surgical procedure for pocket reduction/elimination [ 26 ]. This is where minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has been introduced to appease such issues [ 27 ].…”