• Users Online: 306
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
ORIGINAL RESEARCH
Year : 2013  |  Volume : 3  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 730-733

Comparative evaluation of the efficacy of allograft (dembone) and alloplastic bone graft (osteogen) in the treatment of periodontal intraosssseous defects -A clinico-radiographic study


1 Professor and Head, Dept. of Periodontology, HKES's S.Nijalingappa Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Sedam Road, Gulbarga, Karnataka-585105, India
2 Senior Lecturer, Dept. of Periodontology, NIMS Dental College, Jaipur, Rajasthan - 303121, India
3 Assistant Professor, Dept. of Oral Pathology, Government Dental College and Hospital, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India
4 PG Student,Dept. of Periodontology, HKES's S.Nijalingappa Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Sedam Road, Gulbarga, Karnataka-585105, India
5 PG Student, Dept. of PeriodontologySwargiya Dadasaheb Kalmegh Smruti Dental College and Hospital, Wanadongri, Hingna, Nagpur, Maharashtra State, India
6 Private Practice at Khushi Dental Care, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Correspondence Address:
Veena A Patil
Professor and Head, Dept. of Periodontology, HKES's S.Nijalingappa Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Sedam Road, Gulbarga, Karnataka-585105
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


Rights and PermissionsRights and Permissions

Aim: To compare the clinical and radiographic efficacy of allograft (dembone) alloplastic graft (osteogen) in treatment of periodontal intraosseous defects. Materials & Methods: 30 subjects with atleast one intrabony defect with a probing depth of .7mm and vertical radiographic bone loss .3 mm were enrolled in the study. The patients were divided randomly into two groups - group A received allograft (dembone) with resorbabale collagen membrane and group B received alloplastic material (osteogen) with bioresorbabale GTR membrane. Clinical parameters were recorded from base line till 9 months after surgery and included probing depth, clinical attachment level, recession and amount of defect fill. Results: In both groups, significant gains occurred during the study period. At 9 months, group A exhibited mean probing depth reduction of 3.13 ± 0.8 mm, clinical attachment gain of 4.33 ± 1.12 mm, gingival recession gain of 1.2 ± 6.8 mm and defect fill of 4.53 ± 1. 53 mm. Corresponding values of group B were 3.00 ± 0.63 mm, 4.13 ± 1.0 mm, 1.13 ± 0.8 and 5.1 ± 1.31 mm respectively. There were no significant differences in clinical parameters of both groups (p>0.05). Conclusion: The clinical benefits of dembone were equivalent to osteogen. Osteogen may be an appropriate alternative to conventional grafting materials. However, long term clinical trials in future would further clarify the regenerative efficacy of alloplastic bone grafts.


[PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1304    
    Printed37    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded19    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal