Abstract
Aim
To investigate the potential benefit of enamel matrix derivative (EMD) as adjunct to re‐instrumentation of residual pockets persisting after steps 1 and 2 of periodontal therapy.
Material & Methods
44 adult patients participated in a multicenter feasibility randomized clinical trial with split‐mouth design. They had presented at re‐evaluation after initial non‐surgical periodontal therapy (steps 1 and 2 of periodontal therapy) for generalized periodontitis with at least 2 teeth with residual probing pocket depths (PPD) ≥ 5 and ≤ 8 mm, with bleeding on probing (BOP). Two teeth with similar PPD were randomized to receive re‐instrumentation either with (test) or without (control) adjunctive flapless administration of EMD. Differences in the changes of PPD and BOP from baseline to 6 and 12 months were analyzed, and the frequencies of pocket closure (PPD ≤ 4 mm and no BOP) compared.
Results
For the primary outcome "change of mean PPD after 6 months" a significant additional benefit of 0.79 ± 1.3 mm (p < 0.0001) could be observed for the test group. At 12 months, this difference could be maintained (0.85 ± 1.1 mm; p < 0.0001). The frequency of pocket closure in the test group was 69% at 6 and 80% at 12 months and significantly higher than in the control group with 34% and 42%, respectively (p < 0.01).
Conclusion
The results of the present feasibility study indicate a benefit of adjunctive EMD during non‐surgical retreatment (step 3 of periodontal therapy) of residual deep pockets.
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου