Contact No: +91-8826373757 | +91-8826859373 | 011-25052216
Email: rakesh.its@gmail.com | editor@innovativepublication.com

Current Issue

Year 2019

Volume: 4 , Issue: 2

Print ISSN:-2581-9836

Online ISSN:-2457-0087

Member of


IP International Journal of Periodontology and Implantology


Comparison of guided tissue regeneration using an equine bio-absorbable collagen membrane with equine bone graft with bovine bio-absorbable collagen membrane with bovine bone graft in the management o


Full Text PDF Share on Facebook Share on Twitter


Author Details: Sudhanshu Agrawal, Dipti Singh, Pradyumna Misra, Neeta Misra

Volume : 2

Issue :

Online ISSN : 2457-0087

Print ISSN : 2581-9836

Article First Page : 43

Article End Page : 49


Abstract

Background: Successful periodontal regeneration is considered a gold standard for periodontists. Several GTR materials and bone grafts have been attempted but showed variable success rates.
Objective: The present randomized clinical and radiographic study was undertaken to compare the effectiveness of guided tissue regeneration (GTR) by using equine bioabsorbable collagen membrane with equine bone graft and bovine bioabsorbable collagen membrane with bovine bone graft and in the treatment of periodontal intrabony defects with grade II furcation involvement which are endodontically treated.
Materials and Methods: Ten systemically healthy patients with 20 periodontal intrabony defects were enrolled as a split mouth design. These defects were affected with grade II furcation involvement which are endodontically treated. The recorded measurements included plaque index, gingival bleeding index, gingival recession, PPD, clinical attachment level, radiographic defect depth and radiographic density. The defects were randomly distributed either as a control group (equine bioabsorbable collagen membrane combined with equine bone graft) or a test group (bovine bioabsorbable collagen membrane combined with bovine bone graft).
Results: At 12-month examination, PPD reduction was significantly greater in equine based GTR + bone graft group (3.80±1.33 mm) compared with bovine based group (2.60±1.57 mm), and clinical attachment level gain were 3.60±1.15 and 2.20±1.26 respectively. Radiographic DD reduction was similarly greater in equine GTR + bone graft group (3.30 ± 0.84 mm) compared with bovine based group (2.40±1.09 mm). Also, the change in the radiographic density indicated a significant greater gain of mean gray level as (19.90 ± 16.00) in group 2 whereas 7.10±10.65 in group 1.
Conclusion: Use of equine GTR bioresorbable membrane with bone graft showed significant improved outcomes when compared to use of bovine bioresorbable membrane with bone graft in treating grade II furcation defects. However, the studied groups showed significant improvement within each group when baseline & 12 month data were compared.

Keywords:
Equine Bone Graft; Guided Tissue Regeneration; Intrabony Defect