Treatment of intrabony defects with guided tissue regeneration in aggressive periodontitis: clinical outcomes at 6 and 12 months

Rakmanee, Thanasak; Griffiths, Gareth; Auplish, Gita; Darbar, Ulpee; Petrie, Aviva; Olsen, I; Donos, Nikolaos

doi:10.1007/s00784-015-1608-z

Cited by 18 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In Queiroz et al's study, the use of a nonresorbable barrier resulted in similar changes to those obtained in patients in which the bone substitute was mixed with P-15 without any membrane [33]. In Rakmanee et al's research, both clinical and radiographic results showed substantial comparability between GTR procedures and access flap therapies [27,34]. To the best of our knowledge, the concept of using MPM in patients with AgP has not been tested yet.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 82%

Treatment of intrabony defects with modified perforated membranes in aggressive periodontitis: a 12-month randomized controlled trial

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and radiographic efficacy of guided tissue regeneration with a modified perforated collagen membrane (MPM) or standard collagen membrane (CM) in the treatment of intrabony defects in patients with aggressive periodontitis (AgP). Materials and methods Fifteen AgP patients were included in the study. Two single intrabony defects of at least 3 mm depth with ≥ 6 mm probing pocket depth (PPD) from each patient were randomly assigned to either xenogenic graft plus MPM (test group) or xenogenic graft plus CM (control group). PPD, clinical attachment level (CAL), and gingival recession (GR) were recorded at baseline and at 12 months. The radiographic assessments included the measurements of defect depth (DD), change in alveolar crest position (ACP), linear defect fill (LDF), and percentage defect fill (%DF). Results After treatment, PPD, CAL, DD, and ACP values improved significantly in both groups, without statistical differences between them. However, with respect to LDF and %DF, the 12-month radiographic analysis at MPM-treated sites showed a significant improvement compared to the 6-month outcomes, that was not observed at control sites (additional LDF of 0.4 ± 0.5 mm, p = 0.010 and %DF of 6.4 ± 7.6%, p = 0.025). Conclusions Both strategies proved effective in the treatment of intrabony defects in patients with AgP. Nonetheless, enhanced LDF and %DF 12 months postoperatively at MPM-treated sites may stem from cellular and molecular migration from the periosteum and overlying gingival connective tissue through barrier's pores. Clinical relevance Modification of CM may have positive ramifications on periodontal regeneration.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 82%

Treatment of intrabony defects with modified perforated membranes in aggressive periodontitis: a 12-month randomized controlled trial

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In non‐randomized, comparative studies, the reported outcomes did not show a significant advantage of one surgical approach over another; the differences between groups were not significantly different. In both included RCT, no significant advantage of guided tissue regeneration procedures over EMD and simplified papilla preservation flap (SPPF) approaches could be found …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Apparently, none of the biomaterials used in the included studies could be related to better outcomes if compared to other biomaterials. Considering only the RCT, none of the biomaterials were found to be more beneficial than others . Interestingly, in Queiroz et al.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Periodontal regeneration in aggressive periodontitis patients: A systematic review of the literature

Corbella

Weinstein

Francetti

et al. 2016

J of Invest & Clin Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the present study was to systematically review the existing literature on periodontal regenerative procedures in individuals affected by aggressive periodontitis (AgP). An electronic and manual search was performed using an ad hoc prepared search string. All types of study designs were considered acceptable for inclusion. Data about treated patients, baseline clinical parameters, type of surgery, and outcomes were extracted and recorded. A narrative evaluation of the results was performed. After the article-selection process, a total of 22 full-texts were included in the qualitative synthesis. Twelve papers were case reports; one was a retrospective study; six were non-randomized, comparative studies; and three papers were published on two randomized, controlled trials (RCT). Various biomaterials and surgical techniques were described in the included papers. Based on the existing literature, even considering the relatively low level of evidence, periodontal regenerative surgery could be successfully performed in patients affected by AgP. There is a substantial need of high-quality RCT to support this.

show abstract

“…Despite the careful minimally invasive surgeries, in which a simplified papilla preservation flap was used, interproximal wound dehiscence with membrane exposure occurred in the majority of the regenerative surgical treatment. 15 Regenerative surgery of interproximal intrabony defect is very difficult to perform, particularly in esthetics sensitive areas.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Additional use of autogenous periosteal barrier membrane combined with regenerative therapy in the interproximal intrabony defects: case series

Kim

Lee

2017

J Dent Rehabil Appl Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Regenerative therapy in an interproximal intrabony defect is a challenge due to unaesthetic appearance after surgery. In this article, we introduce a case series of additional use of autogenous periosteal barrier membrane combined with bovine bone mineral and enamel matrix derivative (EMD) in interproximal periodontal intrabony defects to overcome an aforementioned shortcoming. During the periodontal regenerative surgery, autogenous periosteal membrane was additionally adopted besides xenograft material and EMD. Clinical and radiographic examinations were performed before surgery and 6 months after surgical treatment. All clinical parameters were improved and the intrabony defects were resolved on the radiography 6 months after surgery. Moreover, soft tissue esthetics such as the contour of interdental papilla was better than that of conventional regenerative therapy. Periodontal regenerative therapy using several graft materials and bioactive materials was effective in the treatment of periodontal intrabony defect. Moreover, using of autogenous periosteal barrier membrane combined with xenograft and EMD has additional effect for the treatment of an interproximal intrabony defect in terms of augmentation of interdental soft tissue volume.

show abstract

Treatment of intrabony defects with guided tissue regeneration in aggressive periodontitis: clinical outcomes at 6 and 12 months

Abstract: Both periodontal regeneration and conventional periodontal surgery are effective treatments for AgP patients.

Cited by 18 publications

References 45 publications

Treatment of intrabony defects with modified perforated membranes in aggressive periodontitis: a 12-month randomized controlled trial

Treatment of intrabony defects with modified perforated membranes in aggressive periodontitis: a 12-month randomized controlled trial

Periodontal regeneration in aggressive periodontitis patients: A systematic review of the literature

Additional use of autogenous periosteal barrier membrane combined with regenerative therapy in the interproximal intrabony defects: case series

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About