Periodontal repair in intrabony defects treated with a calcium sulfate implant and calcium sulfate barrier

Citation
Ck. Kim et al., Periodontal repair in intrabony defects treated with a calcium sulfate implant and calcium sulfate barrier, J PERIODONT, 69(12), 1998, pp. 1317-1324
Citations number
42
Categorie Soggetti
Dentistry/Oral Surgery & Medicine","da verificare
Journal title
JOURNAL OF PERIODONTOLOGY
ISSN journal
00223492 → ACNP
Volume
69
Issue
12
Year of publication
1998
Pages
1317 - 1324
Database
ISI
SICI code
0022-3492(199812)69:12<1317:PRIIDT>2.0.ZU;2-O
Abstract
THIS RANDOMIZED, CONTROLLED, CLINICAL STUDY was designed to evaluate outcom e following surgical implantation of an allogeneic, freeze-dried, demineral ized bone matrix-calcium sulfate (DBM+CS) composite with a CS barrier in in trabony periodontal defects. Twenty-six patients contributing 26 deep intra bony defects completed the study. Thirteen patients received the DBM+CS imp lant. Thirteen patients received gingival flap surgery alone (GFS; control) . Clinical outcome was assessed at 6 and 12 months postsurgery. At 12 month s postsurgery, probing depth (PD) reduction (mean +/- SD) for the DBM+CS an d GFS group was to 4.3 +/- 0.5 and 3.0 +/- 1.3 mm; clinical attachment gain was to 2.9 +/- 0.8 and 1.7 +/- 1.5 mm; and probing bone level gain was to 2.9 +/- 1.4 and 1.2 +/- 1.2 mm, respectively. There were no apparent differ ences between evaluations at 6 and 12 months postsurgery. Clinical improvem ents were significantly different from presurgery for both groups at both o bservation intervals (P < 0.01). There were no significant differences betw een groups in PD reduction and clinical attachment gain. Probing bone level gain was significantly greater in the DBM+CS group compared to controls (P < 0.05). In summary, surgical implantation of DBM+CS with a CS barrier res ulted in reduced PD and improved attachment levels comparable to that achie ved by gingival flap surgery alone. However gain in probing bone levels in deep intrabony periodontal pockets assessed by clinical parameters was grea ter than that observed by gingival flap surgery alone. These changes were n oted at both 6 and 12 months after surgery. This regenerative technique nee ds further biologic evaluation before being generally accepted.