Cargando…

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

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 i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Srivastava, Sumedha, Tandon, Pradeep, Gupta, Krishna Kumar, Srivastava, Amitabh, Kumar, Vinod, Shrivastava, Trilok
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4555800/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26392691
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-124X.154544
_version_ 1782388251142651904
author Srivastava, Sumedha
Tandon, Pradeep
Gupta, Krishna Kumar
Srivastava, Amitabh
Kumar, Vinod
Shrivastava, Trilok
author_facet Srivastava, Sumedha
Tandon, Pradeep
Gupta, Krishna Kumar
Srivastava, Amitabh
Kumar, Vinod
Shrivastava, Trilok
author_sort Srivastava, Sumedha
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4555800
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45558002015-09-21 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, Sumedha Tandon, Pradeep Gupta, Krishna Kumar Srivastava, Amitabh Kumar, Vinod Shrivastava, Trilok J Indian Soc Periodontol Original Article 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. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4555800/ /pubmed/26392691 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-124X.154544 Text en Copyright: © Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Srivastava, Sumedha
Tandon, Pradeep
Gupta, Krishna Kumar
Srivastava, Amitabh
Kumar, Vinod
Shrivastava, Trilok
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
title 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
title_full 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
title_fullStr 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
title_full_unstemmed 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
title_short 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
title_sort comparative clinico-radiographic study of guided tissue regeneration with bioresorbable membrane and a composite synthetic bone graft for the treatment of periodontal osseous defects
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4555800/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26392691
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-124X.154544
work_keys_str_mv AT srivastavasumedha acomparativeclinicoradiographicstudyofguidedtissueregenerationwithbioresorbablemembraneandacompositesyntheticbonegraftforthetreatmentofperiodontalosseousdefects
AT tandonpradeep acomparativeclinicoradiographicstudyofguidedtissueregenerationwithbioresorbablemembraneandacompositesyntheticbonegraftforthetreatmentofperiodontalosseousdefects
AT guptakrishnakumar acomparativeclinicoradiographicstudyofguidedtissueregenerationwithbioresorbablemembraneandacompositesyntheticbonegraftforthetreatmentofperiodontalosseousdefects
AT srivastavaamitabh acomparativeclinicoradiographicstudyofguidedtissueregenerationwithbioresorbablemembraneandacompositesyntheticbonegraftforthetreatmentofperiodontalosseousdefects
AT kumarvinod acomparativeclinicoradiographicstudyofguidedtissueregenerationwithbioresorbablemembraneandacompositesyntheticbonegraftforthetreatmentofperiodontalosseousdefects
AT shrivastavatrilok acomparativeclinicoradiographicstudyofguidedtissueregenerationwithbioresorbablemembraneandacompositesyntheticbonegraftforthetreatmentofperiodontalosseousdefects
AT srivastavasumedha comparativeclinicoradiographicstudyofguidedtissueregenerationwithbioresorbablemembraneandacompositesyntheticbonegraftforthetreatmentofperiodontalosseousdefects
AT tandonpradeep comparativeclinicoradiographicstudyofguidedtissueregenerationwithbioresorbablemembraneandacompositesyntheticbonegraftforthetreatmentofperiodontalosseousdefects
AT guptakrishnakumar comparativeclinicoradiographicstudyofguidedtissueregenerationwithbioresorbablemembraneandacompositesyntheticbonegraftforthetreatmentofperiodontalosseousdefects
AT srivastavaamitabh comparativeclinicoradiographicstudyofguidedtissueregenerationwithbioresorbablemembraneandacompositesyntheticbonegraftforthetreatmentofperiodontalosseousdefects
AT kumarvinod comparativeclinicoradiographicstudyofguidedtissueregenerationwithbioresorbablemembraneandacompositesyntheticbonegraftforthetreatmentofperiodontalosseousdefects
AT shrivastavatrilok comparativeclinicoradiographicstudyofguidedtissueregenerationwithbioresorbablemembraneandacompositesyntheticbonegraftforthetreatmentofperiodontalosseousdefects