Healing following GTR treatment of bone defects distal to mandibular 2nd molars after surgical removal of impacted 3rd molars.

AIM: The purpose of this study was to study the healing, following guided tissue regeneration (GTR) treatment, of bone defects distal to mandibular 2nd molars (M2s) after surgical removal of impacted mesioangularly or horizontally inclined third molars (M3s) in patients > or = 25 years. METHOD: 20 patients with bilateral soft tissue impacted M3s were included in the split-mouth study. The 2 sites to be treated in each patient were randomised before the 1st operation as to which would undergo the test procedure and which would be the control site. After surgical removal of M3 at test sites, a resorbable polylactic acid (PLA) barrier was attached to M2 to cover the post-surgical bone defect. The flap was then replaced and sutured to cover the barrier. Control sites underwent the same procedure, as did the test sites, with the exception that no barrier was placed. The clinical examinations performed were oral hygiene pre- and 12 months postoperatively and probing pocket depth 12 months postoperatively. The alveolar bone level (ABL) at the distal surface of the M2, as determined from radiographs taken at suture removal and 12 months postsurgery, was chosen to be the primary response variable. RESULTS: Most bone defects showed healing up to 10%-20% of the tooth length at both test and control sites. 2 test and 2 control sites showed no improvement in the bone level. The mean values of bone healing registered in mm from the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) were 2.6 +/- 2.19 SD and 3.0 +/- 2.20 SD for test and control sites, respectively. Different factors affecting the healing result are discussed.

Healing following GTR treatment of intrabony defects distal to mandibular 2nd molars using resorbable and non-resorbable barriers.

AIMS: The objectives of the present, randomised clinical trial were (i) to evaluate the healing of periodontal intrabony defects at the distal aspect of mandibular 2nd molars using a resorbable polylactic acid (PLA) barrier and a non-resorbable polytetrafluoroethylene (e-PTFE) barrier and (ii) to compare the therapeutic effect of the bioresorbable versus the non-resorbable barrier. METHOD: 19 patients with intrabony defects distal to mandibular 2nd molars > or = 4 mm (on radiographs) were included in the study. The defects all remained 5 years after surgical removal of impacted 3rd molars. Following flap elevation and defect debridement, the defects were randomly covered with, either a resorbable PLA or a non-resorbable e-PTFE barrier. Flaps were repositioned and sutured to completely cover the barriers. Treatment was evaluated clinically after 1 year by measurements of probing depth (PD), probing attachment level (PAL), and probing bone level (PBL) and radiographically by measurements of bone levels on computer digitised images of radiographs taken immediately before and 1 year postsurgery. RESULTS: Both treatments resulted in significant PD reduction, PAL gain, and bone fill. The total PD reduction was 5.3 +/- 1.9 mm for the PLA treated sites and 3.7 +/- 1.7 mm for the e-PTFE treated sites (p<0.05). The corresponding values for PAL gain were 4.7 +/- 0.7 mm and 3.6 +/- 1.7 mm (p<0.05) and for PBL gain 5.1 +/- 1.2 and 3.3 +/- 2.0 mm (p<0.05). Radiographic bone fill averaged 3.4 +/- 1.2 for the PLA and 2.0 +/- 1.6 mm for the e-PTFE barriers (p<0.05). Radiographic bone level measurements were significantly smaller than the corresponding clinical measurements, indicating that radiographs tend to underestimate bone fill. CONCLUSIONS: GTR treatment of deep intrabony defects distal to mandibular second molars using resorbable PLA barriers resulted in significant PD reduction, PAL gain and bone fill at least equivalent to the results obtained using non-resorbable e-PTFE barriers.

Treatment of class II furcation defects using resorbable and non-resorbable GTR barriers.

The present study was performed to evaluate the therapeutic effect of a resorbable matrix barrier (test) compared to a non-resorbable barrier (control) on the healing of periodontal tissues in class II furcation defects. Eleven patients, each with two class II furcation defects, underwent guided tissue regeneration surgery. Random selection was used to decide in which of the two sites in each patient test barrier and in which control barrier would be placed. Clinical measurements of the Plaque Index, the Bleeding Index, the Position of the Gingival Margin, as well as Vertical and Horizontal Probing Attachment Levels were made. Whether the barriers were exposed and adverse events were also recorded. It was demonstrated that both procedures led to clinical improvement at the furcation sites. Nine out of eleven defects treated with the test barrier showed improvement while 7 out of 11 achieved the same goal with control barrier. None of the improved sites, though, was completely closed. The conclusion was that within the limits of this study, resorbable test barrier can be used for guided tissue regeneration (GTR) in class II furcation defects with at least as good results as those achieved with non-resorbable control barrier but with the additional benefit of only one operation.