Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2004 Oct;75(10):1357-63.
doi: 10.1902/jop.2004.75.10.1357.

Enamel matrix derivative and guided tissue regeneration in the treatment of dehiscence-type defects: a histomorphometric study in dogs

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Enamel matrix derivative and guided tissue regeneration in the treatment of dehiscence-type defects: a histomorphometric study in dogs

Enilson A Sallum et al. J Periodontol. 2004 Oct.

Abstract

Background: The goal of this investigation was to histologically and histometrically evaluate the healing process of dehiscence-type defects treated by enamel matrix derivative (EMD) and/or guided tissue regeneration (GTR).

Methods: Seven mongrel dogs were used. Buccal osseous dehiscences were surgically created on the mesial roots of the mandibular third and fourth premolars. The defects were exposed to plaque accumulation for 3 months. After this period, the defects were randomly assigned to one of the treatments: open flap debridement (OFD), enamel matrix derivative (EMD), GTR with bioabsorbable membrane (GTR), and the combination of both procedures (EMD + GTR). After 4 months of healing, the dogs were sacrificed and the blocks were processed. The histometric parameters evaluated included gingival recession, epithelial length, connective tissue adaptation, new cementum, and new bone.

Results: A superior length of new cementum was observed in the sites treated by EMD (3.7 mm) and EMD + GTR (3.8 mm) in comparison with OFD (2.4 mm) (P < 0.05). No statistically significant differences were found in the remaining histometric parameters.

Conclusions: Within the limits of this study, it can be concluded that EMD alone or in combination with GTR barriers may effectively promote new cementum formation. The combination of both therapies may not provide additional benefits.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources