Indian Journal of Multidisciplinary Dentistry

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


Veena A Patil1, Neetha Malavalli Srinivasa2, Akshay V Bhargava3, Manthan H Desai4, Anurag A Shendre5, Narpat Singh Rajput6 
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«SQ»s S.Nijalingappa Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Sedam Road, Gulbarga, Karnataka-585105
India

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.


How to cite this article:
Patil VA, Srinivasa NM, Bhargava AV, Desai MH, Shendre AA, Rajput NS. Comparative evaluation of the efficacy of allograft (dembone) and alloplastic bone graft (osteogen) in the treatment of periodontal intraosssseous defects -A clinico-radiographic study.Indian J Multidiscip Dent 2013;3:730-733


How to cite this URL:
Patil VA, Srinivasa NM, Bhargava AV, Desai MH, Shendre AA, Rajput NS. Comparative evaluation of the efficacy of allograft (dembone) and alloplastic bone graft (osteogen) in the treatment of periodontal intraosssseous defects -A clinico-radiographic study. Indian J Multidiscip Dent [serial online] 2013 [cited 2021 Oct 23 ];3:730-733
Available from: https://www.ijmdent.com/article.asp?issn=2229-6360;year=2013;volume=3;issue=3;spage=730;epage=733;aulast=Patil;type=0