PERIODONTAL REPAIR IN INTRABONY DEFECTS TREATED WITH A CALCIUM-CARBONATE IMPLANT AND GUIDED TISSUE REGENERATION

Citation
Ck. Kim et al., PERIODONTAL REPAIR IN INTRABONY DEFECTS TREATED WITH A CALCIUM-CARBONATE IMPLANT AND GUIDED TISSUE REGENERATION, Journal of periodontology, 67(12), 1996, pp. 1301-1306
Citations number
41
Categorie Soggetti
Dentistry,Oral Surgery & Medicine
Journal title
ISSN journal
00223492
Volume
67
Issue
12
Year of publication
1996
Pages
1301 - 1306
Database
ISI
SICI code
0022-3492(1996)67:12<1301:PRIIDT>2.0.ZU;2-B
Abstract
CLINICAL OUTCOME FOLLOWING the concurrent use of a porous resorbable c alcium carbonate (CC) implant and guided tissue regeneration (GTR) in intrabony periodontal defects was evaluated in a randomized four-treat ment parallel arm study. Eighty (80) patients, each contributing one i nterproximal intrabony defect, were assigned to the four treatments (2 0 patients per treatment) including the CC implant and GTR (CC+GTR), G TR alone (GTR control), CC implant alone (CC control), and gingival fl ap surgery alone (GFS control). Fourteen patients treated with CC+GTR, 19 patients treated with the GTR control, 13 patients treated with th e CC control, and 18 patients treated with the GFS control completed t he study, Clinical healing was evaluated 6 months postsurgery and incl uded changes in probing depth, clinical attachment level, probing bone level, and gingival recession. Postsurgery probing depth reduction wa s 4.5 +/- 1.7 mm (CC+GTR; P < 0.01), 4.8 +/- 1.8 mm (GTR; P < 0.01), 3 .7 +/- 2.2 mm (CC; P < 0.01), and 3.3 +/- 1.6 mm (GFS; P < 0.01). Clin ical attachment gain amounted to 3.3 +/- 1.4 mm (CC+GTR; P < 0.01), 4. 0 +/- 2.1 mm (GTR; P < 0.01), 3.0 +/- 2.4 mm (CC; P < 0.01), and 2.0 /- 1.7 mm (GFS; P < 0.01). The CC+GTR and GTR treatments exhibited sig nificantly greater improvements compared to GFS (P < 0.05). Postsurger y probing bone level gain amounted to 4.0 +/- 1.7 mm (CC+GTR; P < 0.01 ), 4.1 +/- 1.5 mm (GTR; P < 0.01), 4.0 +/- 2.2 mm (CC; P < 0.01), and 0.5 +/- 2.0 mm (GFS; P > 0.05). The CC+GTR, GTR, and CC treatments exh ibited significantly greater improvements compared to GFS (P < 0.05). Gingival recession increased significantly compared to presurgery for GTR, CC, and GFS treatments (-0.9 +/- 1.2, -0.7 +/- 0.7, and -1.2 +/- 1.4 mm, respectively; P < 0.01). The results suggest that the concurre nt use of a porous resorbable CC implant and GTR has limited adjunctiv e effect in the treatment of intrabony periodontal defects.