Limits...
A comparative clinico-radiographic study of guided tissue regeneration with bioresorbable membrane and a composite synthetic bone graft for the treatment of periodontal osseous defects.

Srivastava S, Tandon P, Gupta KK, Srivastava A, Kumar V, Shrivastava T - J Indian Soc Periodontol (2015 Jul-Aug)

Bottom Line: The net gain in PD and CAL after 6 months for Group I ([PerioCol] + [Grabio Glascera]) and Group II (Grabio Glascera) was 3.94 ± 1.81 mm, 3.57 ± 2.21 mm and 3.94 ± 1.81, 3.57 ± 2.21 mm, respectively.Defect resolution 3.50 ± 2.34 mm and 5.93 ± 4.01 mm, respectively.Thus, both the treatment modalities are comparable and equally effective.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Periodontology, People's College of Dental Sciences and Research Centre, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India.

ABSTRACT

Aim: The aim was to evaluate the bonefill in periodontal osseous defects with the help of guided tissue regeneration, bioresorbable membrane (PerioCol) + bone graft (Grabio Glascera) in combination and with bonegraft (Grabio Glascera) alone.

Materials and methods: The study involved total 30 sites in systemically healthy 19 patients. The parameters for evaluation includes plaque index sulcus bleeding index with one or more periodontal osseous defects having (i) probing depth (PD) of ≥ 5 mm (ii) clinical attachment loss (CAL) of ≥ 5 mm and (iii) ≥3 mm of radiographic periodontal osseous defect (iv) bonefill (v) crestal bone loss (vi) defect resolution. The study involved the three wall and two wall defects which should be either located interproximally or involving the furcation area. The statistical analysis was done using Statistical Package for Social Sciences, the Wilcoxon signed rank statistic W + for Mann-Whitney U-test.

Results: The net gain in PD and CAL after 6 months for Group I ([PerioCol] + [Grabio Glascera]) and Group II (Grabio Glascera) was 3.94 ± 1.81 mm, 3.57 ± 2.21 mm and 3.94 ± 1.81, 3.57 ± 2.21 mm, respectively. The results of the study for Group I and Group II with regards to mean net bonefill, was 3.25 ± 2.32 (58%) mm and 5.14 ± 3.84 (40.26 ± 19.14%) mm, crestal bone loss - 0.25 ± 0.68 mm and - 0.79 ± 1.19 mm. Defect resolution 3.50 ± 2.34 mm and 5.93 ± 4.01 mm, respectively.

Conclusion: On comparing both the groups together after 6 months of therapy, the results were equally effective for combination of graft and membrane versus bone graft alone since no statistical significant difference was seen between above parameters for both the groups. Thus, both the treatment modalities are comparable and equally effective.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Comparison of pre- and post-operative periodontal health status in Group I
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4555800&req=5

Figure 3: Comparison of pre- and post-operative periodontal health status in Group I

Mentions: The change in PD and CAL for both the groups shows a statistically significant difference between preoperative and postoperative values, that is, both the treatment modalities are effective [Tables 1 and 2] [Graphs 1 and 2] but on comparing the net gain between Group I and Group II, Group I, that is, combination therapy shows slightly higher values than Group II, yet there was no statistically significant difference (P = 0.790) between the two groups. The net gain in PD and CAL for combination and bonegraft were 3.94 ± 1.81 mm, 3.57 ± 2.21 mm and 3.94 ± 1.81 and 3.57 ± 2.21 mm, respectively [Table 3 and Graph 3]. A similar type of study done by Prathap et al.,[20] also shows slightly higher values in combination therapy than the bone graft alone and concluded that statistically no significant difference was found between both the treatment modalities.


A comparative clinico-radiographic study of guided tissue regeneration with bioresorbable membrane and a composite synthetic bone graft for the treatment of periodontal osseous defects.

Srivastava S, Tandon P, Gupta KK, Srivastava A, Kumar V, Shrivastava T - J Indian Soc Periodontol (2015 Jul-Aug)

Comparison of pre- and post-operative periodontal health status in Group I
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4555800&req=5

Figure 3: Comparison of pre- and post-operative periodontal health status in Group I
Mentions: The change in PD and CAL for both the groups shows a statistically significant difference between preoperative and postoperative values, that is, both the treatment modalities are effective [Tables 1 and 2] [Graphs 1 and 2] but on comparing the net gain between Group I and Group II, Group I, that is, combination therapy shows slightly higher values than Group II, yet there was no statistically significant difference (P = 0.790) between the two groups. The net gain in PD and CAL for combination and bonegraft were 3.94 ± 1.81 mm, 3.57 ± 2.21 mm and 3.94 ± 1.81 and 3.57 ± 2.21 mm, respectively [Table 3 and Graph 3]. A similar type of study done by Prathap et al.,[20] also shows slightly higher values in combination therapy than the bone graft alone and concluded that statistically no significant difference was found between both the treatment modalities.

Bottom Line: The net gain in PD and CAL after 6 months for Group I ([PerioCol] + [Grabio Glascera]) and Group II (Grabio Glascera) was 3.94 ± 1.81 mm, 3.57 ± 2.21 mm and 3.94 ± 1.81, 3.57 ± 2.21 mm, respectively.Defect resolution 3.50 ± 2.34 mm and 5.93 ± 4.01 mm, respectively.Thus, both the treatment modalities are comparable and equally effective.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Periodontology, People's College of Dental Sciences and Research Centre, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India.

ABSTRACT

Aim: The aim was to evaluate the bonefill in periodontal osseous defects with the help of guided tissue regeneration, bioresorbable membrane (PerioCol) + bone graft (Grabio Glascera) in combination and with bonegraft (Grabio Glascera) alone.

Materials and methods: The study involved total 30 sites in systemically healthy 19 patients. The parameters for evaluation includes plaque index sulcus bleeding index with one or more periodontal osseous defects having (i) probing depth (PD) of ≥ 5 mm (ii) clinical attachment loss (CAL) of ≥ 5 mm and (iii) ≥3 mm of radiographic periodontal osseous defect (iv) bonefill (v) crestal bone loss (vi) defect resolution. The study involved the three wall and two wall defects which should be either located interproximally or involving the furcation area. The statistical analysis was done using Statistical Package for Social Sciences, the Wilcoxon signed rank statistic W + for Mann-Whitney U-test.

Results: The net gain in PD and CAL after 6 months for Group I ([PerioCol] + [Grabio Glascera]) and Group II (Grabio Glascera) was 3.94 ± 1.81 mm, 3.57 ± 2.21 mm and 3.94 ± 1.81, 3.57 ± 2.21 mm, respectively. The results of the study for Group I and Group II with regards to mean net bonefill, was 3.25 ± 2.32 (58%) mm and 5.14 ± 3.84 (40.26 ± 19.14%) mm, crestal bone loss - 0.25 ± 0.68 mm and - 0.79 ± 1.19 mm. Defect resolution 3.50 ± 2.34 mm and 5.93 ± 4.01 mm, respectively.

Conclusion: On comparing both the groups together after 6 months of therapy, the results were equally effective for combination of graft and membrane versus bone graft alone since no statistical significant difference was seen between above parameters for both the groups. Thus, both the treatment modalities are comparable and equally effective.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus