Next Article in Journal
Dental Restorative Digital Workflow: Digital Smile Design from Aesthetic to Function
Next Article in Special Issue
Spectrophotometric Determination of the Aggregation Activity of Platelets in Platelet-Rich Plasma for Better Quality Control
Previous Article in Journal
Atraumatic Restorative Treatment and Interim Therapeutic Restoration: A Review of the Literature
Previous Article in Special Issue
Combination Therapy for Reconstructive Periodontal Treatment in the Lower Anterior Area: Clinical Evaluation of a Case Series
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessFeature PaperReview

Regeneration of the Periodontal Apparatus in Aggressive Periodontitis Patients

Department of Periodontology and Oral Implantology, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv-Yafo 69979, Israel
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Dent. J. 2019, 7(1), 29; https://doi.org/10.3390/dj7010029
Received: 27 December 2018 / Revised: 9 February 2019 / Accepted: 22 February 2019 / Published: 8 March 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Soft and Hard Tissue Regeneration)
  |  
PDF [2870 KB, uploaded 14 March 2019]
  |  

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to evaluate and compare, retrospectively, the outcome of two different periodontal regeneration procedures in patients suffering from aggressive periodontitis (AgP). Twenty-eight patients were diagnosed with AgP, suffering from several intra-bony defects (IBD); that were treated by one of two periodontal regeneration techniques randomly assigned to each patient: a. guided tissue regeneration (GTR) or b. an application of extracted enamel matrix derivatives (EMD) combined with demineralized bone xenograft particles (DBX). Probing pocket depth (PPD), clinical attachment level (CAL), and gingival recession were recorded. Pre-treatment and follow-up (up to 10 years from the surgery) recordings were analyzed statistically within and between groups. A significant reduction was shown at time on PPD and CAL values, however, not between subject groups. CAL values decreased in all sites. At the EMD group (44 sites), CAL gain was 1.92 mm (±1.68) from pre-treatment to follow-up (p < 0.001) and at the GTR group (12 sites) CAL gain of 2.27 (±1.82) mm. In conclusion, 1–10 years observations have shown that surgical treatment of AgP patients by either GTR or by application of EMD/DBX results in similar successful clinical results. View Full-Text
Keywords: periodontal regeneration; aggressive periodontitis; deproteinized bovine bone; enamel matrix derivatives (Emdogain®); guided tissue regeneration (GTR) periodontal regeneration; aggressive periodontitis; deproteinized bovine bone; enamel matrix derivatives (Emdogain®); guided tissue regeneration (GTR)
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).
SciFeed

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Artzi, Z.; Sudri, S.; Platner, O.; Kozlovsky, A. Regeneration of the Periodontal Apparatus in Aggressive Periodontitis Patients. Dent. J. 2019, 7, 29.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Dent. J. EISSN 2304-6767 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top