A comparison between enamel matrix proteins used alone or in combination with bovine porous bone mineral in the treatment of intrabony periodontal defects in humans
A comparison between enamel matrix proteins used alone or in combination with bovine porous bone mineral in the treatment of intrabony periodontal defects in humans
复制标题
DOI：
10.1902/jop.2000.71.7.1110
复制
发表时间：
2000-07-01
影响因子：
4.3
通讯作者：
Kenney, EB
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Lekovic, V;Camargo, PM;Kenney, EB
背景：研究表明，使用牙釉质基质蛋白（EMP）或牛多孔骨矿物质（BPBM）移植可以实现骨内牙周缺损的临床改善。目前还没有关于 EMP 和 BPBM 在牙周再生治疗中潜在协同作用的报道。本研究的目的是比较单独使用 EMP 或与 BPBM 联合使用治疗人类牙周骨内缺损的临床效果。方法：采用分口设计对 21 对骨内缺损进行手术治疗。骨内缺损采用牙釉质基质蛋白（EMP组）或牙釉质基质蛋白结合牛多孔骨矿物质（EMP/BPBM组）进行治疗。 6 个月时进行再入手术。结果：EMP 组和 EMP/BPBM 组的术前探诊深度、附着水平和手术骨测量相似。 6 个月时进行的术后测量显示，与 EMP 组（颊位点 1.91 +/- 1.42 mm，舌位点 1.85 +/- 1.38 mm）相比，EMP/BPBM 组的探测深度显着减少（颊位点 3.43 +/- 1.32 mm，舌位点 3.36 +/- 1.35 mm）。 EMP/BPBM 组还表现出比 EMP 组（颊位点 1.72 +/- 1.33 mm，舌位点 1.75 +/- 1.37 mm）显着更多的附着增益（颊位点 3.13 +/- 1.41 mm，舌位点 3.11 +/- 1.39 mm）。与 EMP 组（颊侧部位 1.33 +/- 1.17 毫米，舌侧部位 1.41 +/- 1.19 毫米）相比，经过治疗的缺损的手术再进入显示，EMP/BPBM 组的缺损填充量明显更大（颊侧部位 3.82 +/- 1.43 毫米，舌侧部位 3.74 +/- 1.38 毫米）。结论：结果这项研究的结果表明，与术前水平相比，BPBM 能够增强电磁脉冲在减少探诊深度、提高临床附着水平和促进缺损填充方面的效果。
Background: It has been shown that clinical improvement of intrabony periodontal defects can be achieved with the use of enamel matrix proteins (EMPs) or by grafting with bovine porous bone mineral (BPBM). There is no report on the potential synergistic effect of EMPs and BPBM in periodontal regenerative therapy. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical effectiveness of EMPs used alone or in combination with BPBM in the treatment of periodontal intrabony defects in humans.Methods: Twenty-one paired intrabony defects were surgically treated using a split-mouth design. Intrabony defects were treated either with enamel matrix proteins (EMP group) or with enamel matrix proteins combined with bovine porous bone mineral (EMP/BPBM group). Re-entry surgeries were performed at 6 months.Results: Preoperative probing depths, attachment levels, and trans-operative bone measurements were similar for the EMP and EMP/BPBM groups. Postsurgical measurements taken at 6 months revealed a significantly greater reduction in probing depth in the EMP/BPBM group (3.43 +/- 1.32 mm on buccal sites and 3.36 +/- 1.35 mm on lingual sites) when compared to the EMP group (1.91 +/- 1.42 mm on buccal sites and 1.85 +/- 1.38 mm on lingual sites). The EMP/BPBM group also presented with significantly more attachment gain (3.13 +/- 1.41 mm on buccal sites and 3.11 +/- 1.39 mm on lingual sites) than the EMP group (1.72 +/- 1.33 mm on buccal sites and 1.75 +/- 1.37 mm on lingual sites). Surgical re-entry of the treated defects revealed a significantly greater amount of defect fill in favor of the EMP/BPBM group (3.82 +/- 1.43 mm on buccal sites and 3.74 +/- 1.38 mm on lingual sites) as compared to the EMP group (1.33 +/- 1.17 mm on buccal sites and 1.41 +/- 1.19 mm on lingual sites).Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that BPBM has the ability to augment the effects of EMPs in reducing probing depth, improving clinical attachment levels, and promoting defect fill when compared to presurgical levels.