These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Use of bovine-derived anorganic bone associated with guided tissue regeneration in intrabony defects. Six-month evaluation at re-entry.
    Author: Batista EL, Novaes AB, Simonpietri JJ, Batista FC.
    Journal: J Periodontol; 1999 Sep; 70(9):1000-7. PubMed ID: 10505802.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Different filling materials have been associated with guided tissue regeneration (GTR) in order to improve its regenerative potential and predictability. Anorganic bovine bone (ABB) has demonstrated biocompatibility and osteoconductive properties; however, there are limited data regarding its performance in the treatment of intrabony defects. This investigation aimed to evaluate the clinical outcome of the association of anorganic bovine bone with cellulose membranes in intrabony defects after 6 months. METHODS: Twenty-six paired intrabony defects were selected from 11 non-smoking patients with no relevant medical history. The defects were similar regarding the number of bony walls and defect depth, and presented pocket depths > or = 6 mm. Four weeks after completion of basic therapy, probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), and gingival margin position (GP) were recorded (baseline values). The defects were then surgically accessed and debrided, and the intrabony component measured to the nearest millimeter with periodontal probes and customized acrylic stents (distance from the stent to the base of the defect and from the stent to the alveolar crest). Each intrabony defect was randomly assigned to receive the membrane alone (control, C) or the membrane with anorganic bovine bone (test, T). The patients were re-evaluated after 6 months, and re-entry procedures were performed. RESULTS: Significant (P <0.01) improvement in all variables was observed: mean pocket reduction of 4.61+/-1.60 mm (C) and 4.46+/-1.50 mm (T) and clinical attachment gain of 2.85+/-1.46 mm (C) and 3.15+/-1.40 mm (T); the difference between groups was not significant (P >0.05). Nevertheless, gingival recession in the control group (1.84+/-0.89 mm) was significantly (P <0.05) more pronounced than that observed in the test group (1.30+/-0.48 mm). Bone measurements indicated a significant resolution of the defects (P <0.01). A mean defect resolution of 2.76+/-0.72 mm (C) and 2.69+/-1.03 mm (T) and crestal resorption of 1.07+/-0.64 mm (C) and 1.30+/-0.85 mm (T) were detected (P >0.05). Stepwise multiple regression analysis indicated that for both groups, the baseline depth of the defects and the alveolar crest resorption accounted for 82% of the variability of bone fill observed in the control group (F = 23.65, P <0.001) and 89% in the test group (F = 41.32, P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: ABB may be used in conjunction with GTR in the treatment of intrabony defects. Its use, however, did not result in a better outcome than the use of membranes alone. Studies employing more patients would be of interest in order to determine the advantages and indications of the tested approaches on a more predictable basis.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]