首页> 外文期刊>Journal of clinical periodontology >Treatment of intrabony defects with resorbable materials, non-resorbable materials and flap debridement.
【24h】

Treatment of intrabony defects with resorbable materials, non-resorbable materials and flap debridement.

机译:用可吸收材料,不可吸收材料和皮瓣清创术治疗骨内缺损。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Different types of barriers are used in guided tissue regenerative procedures. AIM: This prospective study compared resorbable citric acid ester softened polylactic acid membranes (RM) and non-resorbable expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) barriers (NRM) in GTR treatment of intrabony defects. METHODS: 29 subjects were randomly assigned to the RM group or NRM group. Each patient received one GTR procedure. An open flap debridement (FD) was performed at another site 2 weeks later to evaluate healing potential. Clinical treatment outcomes were finally evaluated 12 months after surgery for changes of pocket depth PD, probing attachment level PAL, and probing bone level PBL, and radiographically for bone change using standardised radiographs. RESULTS: No differences in healing patters after surgery were found between patients in the 2 study groups as evaluated from the FD surgical procedures. NRM treated sites showed less signs of post-surgical inflammation during the 1st 4 weeks of healing than did RM treated sites (p<0.05). GTR-treated defects in the RM group, initially 7.0+/-2.2 mm deep, showed PD reduction of 3.3+/-2.2 mm, PAL gain of 2.4+/-1.8 mm, PBL gain of 2.4+/-3.7 mm (28%) and a radiographic bone fill of 2.3+/-2.4 mm. Defects treated with the NRM exhibited PD reduction of 3.1+/-2.1 mm, PAL gain of 2.4+/-0.8 mm, PBL gain of 2.2+/-1.7 mm (25%) and a radiographic bone fill of 3.3+/-2.2 mm. All improvements were statistically significant (p<0.01) but there was no difference between RM and NRM treatments for any of the efficacy variables. The results of this study indicated that there was no clinically significant difference in treatment outcomes following GTR treatment of intrabony defects with citric acid ester softened polylactic acid membranes as compared to ePTFE barriers. The overall mean inter-proximal vertical bone defect fill at 12 months as assessed from intra-oral radiographs was 44% of the original mean defect depth. CONCLUSIONS: Thus, no clinically significant difference in treatment outcomes was observed following GTR treatment of intrabony defects with citric acid ester softened polylactic acid membranes or ePTFE barriers.
机译:背景:在引导的组织再生程序中使用了不同类型的屏障。目的:这项前瞻性研究比较了可吸收柠檬酸酯软化聚乳酸膜(RM)和不可吸收膨胀聚四氟乙烯(ePTFE)屏障(NRM)在骨内缺陷GTR治疗中的作用。方法:将29名受试者随机分为RM组或NRM组。每个患者接受一个GTR程序。 2周后在另一个部位进行开放性皮瓣清创术(FD),以评估愈合潜力。最终在手术后12个月评估临床治疗结果,以了解袋深PD,探测附着水平PAL和探测骨水平PBL的变化,并使用标准X线摄影术进行骨变化的X线摄影。结果:根据FD手术程序评估,在两个研究组的患者之间未发现手术后愈合模式的差异。 NRM治疗的部位在康复的第一个4周内显示出比RM治疗的部位更少的术后炎症迹象(p <0.05)。 RM组经GTR处理的缺损最初为7.0 +/- 2.2 mm深,显示PD减少3.3 +/- 2.2 mm,PAL增益为2.4 +/- 1.8 mm,PBL增益为2.4 +/- 3.7 mm(28 %)和2.3 +/- 2.4 mm的射线照相骨填充。用NRM治疗的缺损表现为PD减少3.1 +/- 2.1毫米,PAL增益为2.4 +/- 0.8毫米,PBL增益为2.2 +/- 1.7毫米(25%)和X线照相骨填充为3.3 +/- 2.2毫米所有改善均具有统计学意义(p <0.01),但对于任何功效变量,RM和NRM治疗之间无差异。这项研究的结果表明,与ePTFE屏障相比,GTR治疗柠檬酸酯软化聚乳酸膜对骨内缺损的治疗效果没有临床显着差异。根据口腔内X光片评估,在12个月时,近端间垂直骨缺损的总体平均填充率为原始平均缺损深度的44%。结论:因此,在用柠檬酸酯软化聚乳酸膜或ePTFE屏障GTR治疗骨内缺损后,未观察到治疗结果的临床显着差异。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号