A minimally invasive surgical technique with an enamel matrix derivative in the regenerative treatmentofintra-bonydefects:a

Aims: This study was undertaken to describe a new surgical approach (minimally invasive surgical technique, MIST) and to evaluate preliminarily its clinical performance and patient perception associated with the application of enamel matrix derivative (EMD) in the treatment of isolated deep intra-bony defects. Methods: Thirteen deep isolated intra-bony defects in 13 patients were surgically accessed with the MIST. This technique was designed to limit the mesio-distal flap extension and the corono-apical reflection in order to reduce the surgical trauma and increase flap stability. The incision of the defect-associated papilla was performed according to the principles of the papilla preservation techniques. EMD was applied on the debrided root surfaces. Stable primary closure of the flaps was obtained with internal modified mattress sutures. Surgery was performed with the aid of an operating microscope and microsurgical instruments. Clinical outcomes were collected at baseline and at 1 year. Intra-operative and post-operative patient perception was also recorded. Results: Early wound healing was uneventful: primary wound closure was obtained and maintained in all sites with the exception of one site with a small wound dehiscence at week 1. No oedema or haematoma were noted. Patients did not report any pain. Three patients experienced slight discomfort for 2-days post-operatively. The 1-year clinical attachment level (CAL) gain was 4.8 1.9mm. The 1-year percent resolution of the defect was 88.7 20.7%, and reached 100% of the baseline intrabony component in seven sites. Residual probing depths (PD) were 2.9 0.8mm. Differences between baseline and 1-year CAL and PD were both clinically and statistically highly significant ( po0.0001). A minimal increase of 0.1 0.9mm in gingival recession between baseline and 1 year was recorded ( p 50.39). Conclusions: This case cohort indicates that MIST associated with EMD resulted in excellent clinical improvements while limiting patient morbidity. These preliminary findings need to be confirmed in a larger study.

[1]  M. Tonetti,et al.  Clinical performance of a regenerative strategy for intrabony defects: scientific evidence and clinical experience. , 2005, Journal of periodontology.

[2]  M. Nunn,et al.  Prospective assessment of the use of enamel matrix proteins with minimally invasive surgery. , 2005, Journal of periodontology.

[3]  N. Lang,et al.  Healing, post-operative morbidity and patient perception of outcomes following regenerative therapy of deep intrabony defects. , 2004, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[4]  M. Sanz,et al.  Treatment of intrabony defects with enamel matrix proteins or barrier membranes: results from a multicenter practice-based clinical trial. , 2004, The Journal of Periodontology.

[5]  K. G. Murphy,et al.  Guided tissue regeneration for the treatment of periodontal intrabony and furcation defects. A systematic review. , 2003, Annals of periodontology.

[6]  D. Moles,et al.  A systematic review of graft materials and biological agents for periodontal intraosseous defects. , 2002, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[7]  H. Worthington,et al.  A systematic review of guided tissue regeneration for periodontal infrabony defects. , 2002, Journal of periodontal research.

[8]  N. Lang,et al.  Enamel matrix proteins in the regenerative therapy of deep intrabony defects. , 2002, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[9]  N. Lang,et al.  The simplified papilla preservation flap in the regenerative treatment of deep intrabony defects: clinical outcomes and postoperative morbidity. , 2001, Journal of periodontology.

[10]  M. Nunn,et al.  Longitudinal comparison of the periodontal status of patients with moderate to severe periodontal disease receiving no treatment, non-surgical treatment, and surgical treatment utilizing individual sites for analysis. , 2001, Journal of periodontology.

[11]  M. Tonetti,et al.  Microsurgical approach to periodontal regeneration. Initial evaluation in a case cohort. , 2001, Journal of periodontology.

[12]  J. Mellonig,et al.  Histologic evaluation of periodontal healing in humans following regenerative therapy with enamel matrix derivative. A 10-case series. , 2000, Journal of periodontology.

[13]  M. Reynolds,et al.  The treatment of intrabony defects with bone grafts. , 2000, Periodontology 2000.

[14]  M. Tonetti,et al.  Focus on intrabony defects: guided tissue regeneration. , 2000, Periodontology 2000.

[15]  J. Mellonig Human histologic evaluation of a bovine-derived bone xenograft in the treatment of periodontal osseous defects. , 2000, The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry.

[16]  M. Tonetti,et al.  The simplified papilla preservation flap. A novel surgical approach for the management of soft tissues in regenerative procedures. , 1999, The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry.

[17]  J. Mellonig Enamel matrix derivative for periodontal reconstructive surgery: technique and clinical and histologic case report. , 1999, The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry.

[18]  N. Lang,et al.  Generalizability of the added benefits of guided tissue regeneration in the treatment of deep intrabony defects. Evaluation in a multi-center randomized controlled clinical trial. , 1998 .

[19]  S. Lynch,et al.  Clinical, radiographic, and histologic evaluation of human periodontal defects treated with Bio-Oss and Bio-Gide. , 1998, The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry.

[20]  Harrel Sk A minimally invasive surgical approach for periodontal bone grafting. , 1998 .

[21]  Murphy Kg Postoperative healing complications associated with Gore-Tex Periodontal Material. Part II. Effect of complications on regeneration. , 1995 .

[22]  S. Harrel,et al.  Granulation tissue removal in routine and minimally invasive procedures. , 1995, Compendium of continuing education in dentistry.

[23]  J. Slots,et al.  Periodontal pathogens on polytetrafluoroethylene membrane for guided tissue regeneration inhibit healing. , 1995, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[24]  M. Tonetti,et al.  The modified papilla preservation technique. A new surgical approach for interproximal regenerative procedures. , 1995, Journal of periodontology.

[25]  P. McMillan,et al.  Periodontal repair in dogs: expanded polytetrafluoroethylene barrier membranes support wound stabilization and enhance bone regeneration. , 1993, Journal of periodontology.

[26]  M. Tonetti,et al.  Periodontal regeneration of human infrabony defects. I. Clinical measures. , 1993, Journal of periodontology.

[27]  M. Tonetti,et al.  Periodontal regeneration of human infrabony defects. II. Re-entry procedures and bone measures. , 1993, Journal of periodontology.

[28]  Ray Williams,et al.  Periodontal regeneration of human infrabony defects. III. Diagnostic strategies to detect bone gain. , 1993, Journal of periodontology.

[29]  U. Wikesjö,et al.  Periodontal repair in dogs: effect of a composite graft protocol on healing in supraalveolar periodontal defects. , 1992, Journal of periodontology.

[30]  E Romberg,et al.  Histologic evaluation of new attachment apparatus formation in humans. Part III. , 1989, Journal of periodontology.

[31]  J. Wennström,et al.  New attachment formation in the human periodontium by guided tissue regeneration. Case reports. , 1986, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[32]  T. Karring,et al.  New attachment following surgical treatment of human periodontal disease. , 1982, Journal of clinical periodontology.

[33]  J. E. Williams,et al.  Clinical evaluation of freeze-dried bone allografts in periodontal osseous defects. Part III. Composite freeze-dried bone allografts with and without autogenous bone grafts. , 1983, Journal of periodontology.

[34]  T. O'Leary,et al.  The plaque control record. , 1972, Journal of periodontology.

[35]  W. H. Hiatt,et al.  Repair following mucoperiosteal flap surgery with full gingival retention. , 1968, Journal of periodontology.