A clinical comparison of the new attachment obtained by guided tissue regeneration and coronally positioned flap techniques in the management of human molar furcation defects

Periodontal regeneration - furcation defects: a systematic review from the AAP Regeneration Workshop

BACKGROUND

The aim of this review is to present the available evidence regarding the effectiveness of different regenerative approaches for the treatment of furcation defects in specific clinical scenarios compared with conventional surgical therapy to provide clinical guidelines for the therapeutic management of furcation defects and to identify priorities for future research that may advance the understanding of periodontal regenerative medicine.

METHODS

A comprehensive search based on predetermined eligibility criteria was conducted to identify human original studies and systematic reviews on the topic of periodontal regeneration of furcation defects. Two reviewers independently screened the title and abstract of the entries yielded from the initial search. Subsequently, both reviewers read the full-text version of potentially eligible studies, made a final article selection, and extracted the data of the selected studies considering specific clinical scenarios. The clinical scenarios contemplated in this review included the following: 1) facial and interproximal Class I defects in maxillary molars; 2) facial and lingual Class I defects in mandibular molars; 3) facial and interproximal Class II furcation defects in maxillary molars; 4) facial and lingual Class II furcation defects in mandibular molars; 5) Class III furcation defects in maxillary molars; 6) Class III furcation defects in mandibular molars; and 7) Class I, II, or III furcation defects in maxillary premolars. Endpoints of interest included different clinical, radiographic, microbiologic, histologic, and patient-reported outcomes.

RESULTS

The initial search yielded a total of 1,500 entries. The final selection consisted of 150 articles, of which six were systematic reviews, 109 were clinical trials, 27 were case series, and eight were case reports. A summary of the main findings of previously published systematic reviews and the available evidence relative to the indication of regenerative approaches for the treatment of furcation defects compared with conventional surgical therapy are presented. Given the marked methodologic heterogeneity and the wide variety of materials and techniques applied in the selected clinical trials, the conduction of a meta-analysis was not viable.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of the reviewed evidence, the following conclusions can be drawn. 1) Periodontal regeneration has been demonstrated histologically and clinically for the treatment of maxillary facial or interproximal and mandibular facial or lingual Class II furcation defects. 2) Although periodontal regeneration has been demonstrated histologically for the treatment of mandibular Class III defects, the evidence is limited to one case report. 3) Evidence supporting regenerative therapy in maxillary Class III furcation defects in maxillary molars is limited to clinical case reports. 4) In Class I furcation defects, regenerative therapy may be beneficial in certain clinical scenarios, although most Class I furcation defects may be successfully treated with non-regenerative therapy. 5) Future research efforts should be primarily directed toward the conduction of clinical trials to test novel regenerative approaches that place emphasis primarily on patient-reported outcomes and also on histologic demonstration of periodontal regeneration. Investigators should also focus on understanding the influence that local, systemic, and technical factors may have on the outcomes of regenerative therapy in furcation defects.

Healing response of apicomarginal defects to two guided tissue regeneration techniques in periradicular surgery: a double-blind, randomized-clinical trial

AIM

To compare healing responses to periosteal sliding grafts and polyglactin 910 periodontal mesh used as guided tissue regeneration (GTR) materials/techniques when both periapical and periradicular bone loss are present.

METHODOLOGY

Thirty patients with suppurative chronic apical periodontitis with apicomarginal communication were selected and allocated randomly into two groups according to the barrier technique to be used during periradicular surgery: periosteal graft group (n = 15) and bioabsorbable membrane group (n = 15). Clinical and radiological evaluations were completed prior to surgery, a week later and every 3 months after surgery up to 12 months to measure the periodontal pocket depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), gingival margin position (GMP), size of periapical lesion, percentage reduction of the periapical rarefaction, and periapical healing.

RESULTS

Both groups showed highly significant (P < 0.001) reductions in periodontal PD, CAL and size of periapical lesion at 12 months whilst GMP was unaltered. No significant difference between the experimental groups was evident for these parameters, or for the percentage reduction of size of the periapical lesion and clinical-radiographic healing.

CONCLUSION

Guided tissue regeneration applied to apicomarginal defects using sliding periosteal grafts and use of bioabsorbable membranes led to similar enhancements of the clinical outcome of periradicular surgery in terms of periapical healing, gain of periodontal support, PD reduction and minimal recession of the gingival margin.

A systematic review of guided tissue regeneration for periodontal furcation defects. What is the effect of guided tissue regeneration compared with surgical debridement in the treatment of furcation defects?

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the evidence of effectiveness of guided tissue regeneration (GTR) for furcation defects.

BACKGROUND

The evidence for the effectiveness of GTR in furcation defects has not yet been systematically appraised.

METHODS

We searched for randomized controlled trials with at least 6 months' follow-up comparing GTR with surgical debridement (open flap debridement, OFD). Data sources included electronic databases, hand-searched journals and contact with experts. Screening, data abstraction and quality assessment were conducted independently by multiple reviewers. The primary outcome measure was reduction in open horizontal furcation depth, secondary outcomes were frequency of furcation closure, gain in horizontal and vertical probing attachment and reduction of vertical probing depth.

RESULTS

For the primary outcome, reduction in horizontal furcation depth assessed during re-entry, the weighted mean difference between GTR and control was 1.51 mm (95% CI [0.39-2.62], chi-square for heterogeneity 67.6 (df = 3), P < 0.001) in mandibular class II furcations, 1.05 mm (95% CI [0.46-1.64, chi-square for heterogeneity 34.9 (df = 3), P < 0.001) in maxillary class II furcations, and 0.87 mm (95% CI [-0.08-1.82], chi-square for heterogeneity 0.1 (df = 4), P = 0.991) in studies that had combined mandibular and maxillary class II furcations. For the secondary outcomes, GTR treatment led to significantly better results than open flap debridement. No meta-analysis could be performed for frequency of furcation closure because of sparse data.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, GTR was consistently more effective than OFD in reducing open horizontal furcation depths, horizontal and vertical attachment levels and pocket depths for mandibular or maxillary class II furcation defects. However, these improvements were modest, variable and there was only a limited number of studies available to appraise the effects, thus limiting general conclusions about the clinical benefit of GTR. Future studies should aim to identify factors associated with achieving consistent and more pronounced benefits over open flap debridement.

A comparison of porous and non-porous teflon membranes plus demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft in the treatment of class II buccal/lingual furcation defects: a clinical reentry study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this 9-month reentry study was to compare the regenerative healing using porous (P) and non-porous (NP) teflon barrier membranes plus demineralized freeze dried bone allografts (DFDBA) in Class II buccal/lingual furcation defects.

METHODS

Twenty-four patients, 13 males and 11 females, ages 38 to 75 (mean 54 +/- 10), were included in this study. Each patient had adult periodontitis and one Class II furcation defect measuring > or = 3 mm open horizontal probing depth. Twelve patients were randomly selected to receive the NP treatment and 12 received the P membrane. All defects received a DFDBA graft. Measurements were performed by a masked examiner.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences (P>0.05) were found between NP and P groups at any time with respect to any open or closed measure. Improvement in mean open horizontal probing depth was significant for both the NP (2.33 +/- 0.78 mm) and P (2.75 +/- 0.75 mm) groups. Mean clinical attachment level gains at 9 months were significant for both NP (1.50 +/- 1.62 mm) and P (2.50 +/- 2.11 mm) groups. Seventeen of 24 defects had an intrabony component and > or = 50% fill was obtained in 100% of these defects.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this 9-month reentry study comparing the use of porous and non-porous barrier membranes with a DFDBA graft indicate that there were no statistically significant differences between groups. Both groups showed a statistically significant improvement following the treatment of Class II furcation defects in humans.