...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Periodontology >Clinical comparison of an enamel matrix derivative used alone or in combination with a bovine-derived xenograft for the treatment of periodontal osseous defects in humans.
【24h】

Clinical comparison of an enamel matrix derivative used alone or in combination with a bovine-derived xenograft for the treatment of periodontal osseous defects in humans.

机译:牙釉质基质衍生物单独使用或与牛源异种移植物联合用于治疗人牙周骨缺损的临床比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: The combination of bone replacement graft materials has been suggested for the treatment of periodontal osseous defects. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of enamel matrix derivative (EMD) combined with a bovine-derived xenograft (BDX) as compared to EMD alone in the treatment of intraosseous defects in patients with moderate to advanced periodontitis. METHODS: Sixteen adult patients with at least 2 intrabony defects were entered in this split-mouth design study. Defects were treated with EMD alone or EMD + BDX. Reentries were performed 6 to 8 months after initial surgery. The following soft and hard tissue measurements were recorded prior to initial surgery and at reentry: probing depth (PD), gingival margin location, clinical attachment level (CAL), depth of defect, and crestal bone level. Statistical analyses were performed to determine changes in PD, CAL, fill of osseous defect, and crestal resorption. Percentages of bone fill (%BF) and defect resolution (%DR) were also calculated. RESULTS: The most significant results were that gingival recession was greater for the group treated with EMD alone (0.8 +/- 0.8 mm) compared to EMD + BDX (0.3 +/- 0.6 mm) (P = 0.04) and bone fill was greater for EMD + BDX (4.0 +/- 0.8 mm) compared to EMD alone (3.1 +/- 1.0 mm) (P = 0.02). The measures for PD reduction, attachment level gain, crestal resorption, %BF, and %DR did not present a statistically significant difference (P > 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: This study evaluated the performance of EMD + BDX and EMD alone. The results demonstrated that a significant improvement in clinical parameters was observed. When comparing both modalities, a statistically significant difference was only found for gingival recession and bone fill, yielding a more favorable outcome towards the combined approach.
机译:背景:骨替代移植材料的组合已被建议用于治疗牙周骨缺损。这项研究的目的是评估与单独使用EMD相比,釉质基质衍生物(EMD)与牛源异种移植物(BDX)联合治疗中度至晚期牙周炎患者骨内缺损的有效性。方法:将16例至少有2个骨内缺损的成年患者纳入这项裂口设计研究。缺陷用单独的EMD或EMD + BDX处理。初次手术后6至8个月进行再入。在初次手术之前和再入时记录以下软组织和硬组织测量值:探测深度(PD),牙龈边缘位置,临床附着水平(CAL),缺损深度和,骨水平。进行统计分析以确定PD,CAL,骨缺损的充盈和,吸收。还计算了骨填充百分比(%BF)和缺陷分辨率(%DR)。结果:最显着的结果是,与单独使用EMD + BDX(0.3 +/- 0.6 mm)(P = 0.04)相比,单独使用EMD(0.8 +/- 0.8 mm)治疗的组牙龈退缩更大(P = 0.04) EMD + BDX(4.0 +/- 0.8毫米)相比,单独的EMD(3.1 +/- 1.0毫米)(P = 0.02)。 PD降低,依附水平增加,地壳吸收,%BF和%DR的测量值差异无统计学意义(P> 0.10)。结论:本研究评估了EMD + BDX和EMD的性能。结果表明观察到临床参数的显着改善。比较这两种方式时,仅在牙龈退缩和骨充盈方面发现了统计学上的显着差异,对联合治疗产生了更有利的结果。

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