Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Clin Periodontol. 1995 Apr;22(4):306-15.

Clinical and radiographical split-mouth-study on resorbable versus non-resorbable GTR-membranes.

Author information

1
Department of Operative Dentistry and Peridontology, University of Regensburg, Germany.

Abstract

The aim of this prospective split-mouth-study was to compare the 5-months-healing results after implantation of resorbable (Polyglactin-910) and non-resorbable (e-PTFE) GTR-membranes. 12 healthy patients with 41 periodontal defects were treated. Radiographical and clinical examinations (papillary bleeding index, gingival recession, probing pocket depth, probing attachment level, and furcation depth) were carried out under standardized conditions immediately before and 5 months after surgery. The vertical relative attachment gain (V-rAG) was calculated as a % of the bony defect depth (intra-operatively measured) at baseline, and the horizontal relative attachment gain (H-rAG) as a % of the furcation depth at baseline. The standardized radiographs were evaluated blind by 4 experienced examiners for changes of the alveolar bone. Furthermore, digital subtraction radiography was carried out using the standard deviation of the grey level histograms in the experimental region and in a control region as a test parameter for bone changes. Both types of membranes achieved an attachment gain. Using the split-mouth-design, no statistically significant (< or = 0.05) difference between the two membranes could be detected (number of defects/median) with regard to V-rAG (Polyglactin: 12/77.5%, e-PTFE: 12/73.2%) or to H-rAG of class-II-furcations (Polyglactin: 5/66.7%, e-PTFE: 5/66.7%), or to bone changes using conventional and subtraction radiographic evaluation. In conclusion based on this 5-months-study, the resorbable membranes provided attachment gain comparable to the e-PTFE-membranes.

[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley
Loading ...
Support Center