Clinical evaluation of demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft and enamel matrix derivative versus enamel matrix derivative alone for the treatment of periodontal osseous defects in humans
- PMID: 15562907
- DOI: 10.1902/jop.2004.75.10.1309
Clinical evaluation of demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft and enamel matrix derivative versus enamel matrix derivative alone for the treatment of periodontal osseous defects in humans
Abstract
Background: A recent study suggests that the addition of enamel matrix derivative to demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft may enhance osseoinduction. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft (DFDBA) in combination with enamel matrix derivative (EMD + DFDBA) compared to enamel matrix derivative (EMD) alone in the treatment of human intrabony periodontal defects.
Methods: Forty patients with a total of 67 sites (intrabony defect > or = 3 mm deep) were selected to participate in this single-masked, parallel design, randomized, controlled clinical trial. Each subject received either EMD alone (34 sites) or in combination with DFDBA (33 sites). Soft tissue measurements included probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), and recession. Hard tissue measurements included defect depth, alveolar crestal resorption, and defect morphology. Following 6 months of healing, all soft tissue measurements were repeated. Forty-nine sites (EMD + DFDBA = 26 sites, EMD alone = 23 sites) were surgically reentered. Statistical analyses were performed using unpaired and paired Student t tests.
Results: Analyses showed a significant improvement in soft tissue parameters for both treatment groups (P < 0.001) as compared to preoperative measurements. There were no statistical differences between treatment groups. The probing depth reduction (PDR) for the EMD + DFDBA was 3.6 +/- 0.2 mm, while the EMD alone had a PDR of 4.0 +/- 0.3 mm. The CAL gain for the EMD + DFDBA group was 3.0 +/- 0.3 mm and 3.2 +/- 0.3 mm for the EMD alone group. The mean value for bone fill in the EMD + DFDBA group was 3.7 +/- 0.2 mm (74.9%), while the EMD alone group demonstrated a mean bone fill of 2.6 +/- 0.4 mm (55.3%). While there were no significant differences between the two treatments with regards to soft tissue measurements, the combination of EMD + DFDBA therapy yielded statistically significant improvements in bone fill, crestal resorption, and percentage of sites gaining greater than 50% and 90% bone fill when compared to EMD alone (P < 0.001).
Conclusion: The results of this study indicate that there may be an enhancement of hard tissue parameters when enamel matrix derivative is added to demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft.
Similar articles
-
Clinical evaluation of demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft with and without enamel matrix derivative for the treatment of periodontal osseous defects in humans.J Periodontol. 2008 Dec;79(12):2273-80. doi: 10.1902/jop.2008.080259. J Periodontol. 2008. PMID: 19053917 Clinical Trial.
-
Clinical comparison of an enamel matrix derivative used alone or in combination with a bovine-derived xenograft for the treatment of periodontal osseous defects in humans.J Periodontol. 2002 Apr;73(4):433-40. doi: 10.1902/jop.2002.73.4.433. J Periodontol. 2002. PMID: 11990445 Clinical Trial.
-
A retrospective case series comparing the use of demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft and freeze-dried bone allograft combined with enamel matrix derivative for the treatment of advanced osseous lesions.J Periodontol. 2002 Aug;73(8):942-9. doi: 10.1902/jop.2002.73.8.942. J Periodontol. 2002. PMID: 12211505
-
The use of enamel matrix derivative alone versus in combination with bone grafts to treat patients with periodontal intrabony defects: a meta-analysis.J Am Dent Assoc. 2012 Sep;143(9):e46-56. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2012.0327. J Am Dent Assoc. 2012. PMID: 22942155 Review.
-
Treatment of intrabony periodontal defects with enamel matrix derivative: a literature review.J Periodontol. 2002 Nov;73(11):1360-76. doi: 10.1902/jop.2002.73.11.1360. J Periodontol. 2002. PMID: 12479642 Review.
Cited by
-
Enamel matrix protein derivative and/or synthetic bone substitute for the treatment of mandibular class II buccal furcation defects. A 12-month randomized clinical trial.Clin Oral Investig. 2016 Sep;20(7):1597-606. doi: 10.1007/s00784-015-1642-x. Epub 2015 Nov 10. Clin Oral Investig. 2016. PMID: 26556577 Clinical Trial.
-
Enamel matrix derivative monotherapy versus combination therapy with bone grafts for periodontal intrabony defects: An updated review.Jpn Dent Sci Rev. 2024 Dec;60:239-249. doi: 10.1016/j.jdsr.2024.08.001. Epub 2024 Oct 23. Jpn Dent Sci Rev. 2024. PMID: 39507278 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Enamel matrix derivative and bone grafts for periodontal regeneration of intrabony defects. A systematic review and meta-analysis.Clin Oral Investig. 2015 Sep;19(7):1581-93. doi: 10.1007/s00784-015-1491-7. Epub 2015 May 27. Clin Oral Investig. 2015. PMID: 26008887
-
Enamel Matrix Derivative and Autogenous Bone Graft for Periodontal Regeneration of Intrabony Defects in Humans: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Materials (Basel). 2019 Aug 19;12(16):2634. doi: 10.3390/ma12162634. Materials (Basel). 2019. PMID: 31430899 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Enamel matrix protein derivatives: role in periodontal regeneration.Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 2011 Dec 1;3:79-92. doi: 10.2147/CCIDEN.S25347. Print 2011. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 2011. PMID: 23674918 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical