Treatment of Intrabony Defects With an Enamel Matrix Protein Derivative or Bioabsorbable Membrane: An 8‐Year Follow‐Up Split‐Mouth Study

Sculean, Anton; Schwarz, Frank; Miliauskaite, Asta; Kiss, Alice; Arweiler, Nicole Birgit; Becker, Jürgen; Brecx, M

doi:10.1902/jop.2006.060002

Cited by 52 publications

(92 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In their international multi-center study, Tonetti et al 21) reported a mean gain in CAL of 3.1 mm at 1 year. The 2-year results in the present study are also in agreement with other long-term data 4,[18][19][20] . Heijl et al 5) reported that distinct radiographical bone-fill was observed at as early as 5 months after surgery with EMD, and further bone gain may be expected for as long as 3 years.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Two-year Follow-up of Treatment of Intrabony Periodontal Defect with Enamel Matrix Derivative

Fujinami

Hayakawa

Ota

et al. 2011

Bull. Tokyo Dent. Coll.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this retrospective clinical study was to evaluate 2-year follow-up results following regenerative periodontal surgery for intrabony defects using enamel matrix derivative (EMD). Thirteen patients (mean age: 53 years) with a clinical diagnosis of chronic periodontitis were subjected to data analysis. A total of 25 sites with intrabony defects received regenerative therapy with EMD. Follow-up continued for a minimum of 2 years. Treatment of intrabony defects with EMD yielded a statistically significant improvement in the mean values of probing depth and gains in clinical attachment level (CAL) at 2 years compared with those at baseline (pϽ0.001). Sites treated with EMD demonstrated a mean CAL gain of 3.4 mm and 3.2 mm at 6 months and 2 years, respectively. No statistically significant difference in gain in CAL was found between the 6-month and 2-year results. A gain in CAL of Ն3 mm from at baseline was found in 17 sites at 2 years. This gain was achieved with minimal recession of gingival margin and was sustained over a given period of time. A trend toward a progressive increase in radiopacity, suggestive of bone-fill, was observed. In summary, treatment of intrabony defects with EMD resulted in clinically favorable outcomes. The clinical improvements obtained with regenerative therapy with EMD were maintained over a period of 2 years.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Two-year Follow-up of Treatment of Intrabony Periodontal Defect with Enamel Matrix Derivative

Fujinami

Hayakawa

Ota

et al. 2011

Bull. Tokyo Dent. Coll.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At 2 years, the mean value was 3.1 mm. This was comparable to that (3.2 mm) reported in our previous smaller-scale retrospective study [9] and other studies [15, 16]. …”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…This value is slightly smaller than the value of 3.2 mm reported in a meta-analysis on the management of 317 angular bone defects with EMD during an observation period ranging from 6 months to 1 year [14] and the value of 3.1 mm reported in a multi-center study [15]. At 2 years, the mean value was 3.1 mm.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 54%

Periodontal regenerative therapy with enamel matrix derivative in the treatment of intrabony defects: a prospective 2-year study

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo date, enamel matrix derivative (EMD) has been considered to be one of the few biomaterials for clinical use capable of demonstrating true periodontal regeneration. The aim of this two-center prospective clinical study was to evaluate 2-year outcome of periodontal regenerative therapy using EMD in the treatment of intrabony defects, performed as an ‘advanced medical treatment’ under the national healthcare system in Japan.ResultsPatients with chronic periodontitis who have completed initial periodontal therapy at either of the two dental school clinics were enrolled. Each contributed at least one intrabony defect of ≥3 mm in depth. During surgery, EMD was applied to the defect following debridement. Twenty-two participants (mean age 55.2 years old, 9 men and 13 women) completed 2-year reevaluation, and a total of 42 defects were subjected to data analysis. Mean gains in clinical attachment level (CAL) at 1 and 2 years were 2.9 mm (38% of baseline CAL) and 3.1 mm (41%), respectively, both showing a significant improvement from baseline. There was also a significant reduction in probing depth (PD): mean reductions at 1 and 2 years were 3.2 and 3.3 mm, respectively. There was a progressive improvement in the mean percentages of bone fill from 26% at 1 year to 36% at 2 years. No significant difference in CAL gain at 2 years was found between 3-wall bone defects and other defect types combined. In multiple regression analysis, the baseline PD was significantly associated with CAL gain at 2 years. In this population of patients, the treatment of intrabony defects with EMD yielded clinically favorable outcomes, as assessed by periodontal and radiographical parameters, over a period of 2 years.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13104-017-2572-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

“…Studies evaluating long‐term results after GTR therapy of infrabony lesions using non‐resorbable and/or bioabsorbable barriers extend over periods of 5 years 9–13 and 6 to 7 years 14 . Results after longer observation periods are scarce 15,16 . Hence, this 10‐year follow‐up case series was undertaken to examine the long‐term results of the infrabony defect subsample of a 24‐month longitudinal study 10,18,19 comparing the results of GTR therapy using non‐resorbable or bioabsorbable barriers in infrabony, Class II, and III furcation defects.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most clinical studies evaluating long‐term results after GTR therapy of infrabony lesions using non‐resorbable and/or bioabsorbable barriers report results for periods of 5 years 9–13 and 6 to 7 years 14 . Results after longer observation periods are scarce 15,16 . To our best knowledge, only one long‐term study 17 has compared the results after implantation of non‐resorbable and bioabsorbable barriers over 10 years in Class II furcation defects but not in infrabony defects.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Long‐Term Results of Guided Tissue Regeneration Therapy With Non‐Resorbable and Bioabsorbable Barriers. IV. A Case Series of Infrabony Defects After 10 Years

Pretzl

Kim

Holle

et al. 2008

Journal of Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Treatment of Intrabony Defects With an Enamel Matrix Protein Derivative or Bioabsorbable Membrane: An 8‐Year Follow‐Up Split‐Mouth Study

Abstract: Within their limits, the present results indicate the following: 1) the clinical improvements obtained following treatment with EMD or GTR can be maintained over a period of 8 years; and 2) further studies of much higher power need to be performed to support equivalence.

Cited by 52 publications

References 60 publications

Two-year Follow-up of Treatment of Intrabony Periodontal Defect with Enamel Matrix Derivative

Two-year Follow-up of Treatment of Intrabony Periodontal Defect with Enamel Matrix Derivative

Periodontal regenerative therapy with enamel matrix derivative in the treatment of intrabony defects: a prospective 2-year study

Long‐Term Results of Guided Tissue Regeneration Therapy With Non‐Resorbable and Bioabsorbable Barriers. IV. A Case Series of Infrabony Defects After 10 Years

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About