| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立陽明大學 === 臨床牙醫學研究所 === 91 === The present study was designed to compare 6 month therapeutic outcomes of GTR with Atrisorb in situ and BioMend in mandibular intrabony defects. The study comprised of 30 mandibular intrabony defects. Twenty defects were randomly selected for treatment with either Atrisorb in situ (polylactic acid membrane) or BioMend (collagen membrane) combined with DFDBA. The rest 10 defects were treated with open flap curettage and served as control. Clinical parameters including plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), bleeding index (BI), periodontal probing depth (PPD), clinical attachment level (CAL) and marginal tissue recession (REC) were measured at baseline and 6 months postoperatively. The customized acrylic stents with guiding grooves were used to minimize the measurement errors. Radiographic examination was used to evaluate the bone height changes with linear measurement at baseline, 3 months and 6 months postoperatively.
There was significant reduction of periodontal probing depth in GTR procedure using either Atrisorb in situ (2.50±1.35 mm, p＜0.001) or BioMend (2.60±1.08 mm, p＜0.001) as well as open flap curettage (2.20±1.14 mm, p＜0.001) 6 months postoperatively. Clinical attachment gain was significant in GTR with Atrisorb in situ (2.40±1.14 mm, p＜0.001), or BioMend (2.60±1.26 mm, p＜0.001) and open flap curettage (1.80±0.92 mm, p＜0.001). But PPD reduction and clinical attachment gain had no significant difference among the three groups. There was no advance marginal tissue recession in Atrisorb in situ group (0±1.63 mm) and BioMend group (0±0.67 mm). Although slight marginal tissue recession was noted in open flap curettage (0.40±0.52 mm, p=0.037), there was no significant difference among the three groups. Defect depth remained the same at different time intervals in GTR procedures using either Atrisorb in situ or BioMend. Defect depth was significantly reduced in open flap curettage at 6 months (1.61±0.78 mm, p=0.030). However, defect depth reduction had no significant difference among the three groups at different time intervals. There was no significant bone fill at different time intervals in Atrisorb in situ group and open flap curettage. Significant bone fill was noted in BioMend group between baseline and 6 months (2.57±1.64 mm, p=0.018), 3 month and 6 months (1.98±1.37 mm, p=0.027). However, within group comparison the change of the amount of bone fill had no significant difference at different time intervals. There was no significant crestal bone resorption either in Atrisorb in situ or BioMend and flap surgery alone.
|
|---|
