Guided tissue regeneration in human Class II furcation defects using a diphenylphosphorylazide-cross-linked collagen membrane: a consecutive case series

Finding the Perfect Membrane: Current Knowledge on Barrier Membranes in Regenerative Procedures: A Descriptive Review

Guided tissue regeneration (GTR) and guided bone regeneration (GBR) became common procedures in the corrective phase of periodontal treatment. In order to obtain good quality tissue neo-formation, most techniques require the use of a membrane that will act as a barrier, having as a main purpose the blocking of cell invasion from the gingival epithelium and connective tissue into the newly formed bone structure. Different techniques and materials have been developed, aiming to obtain the perfect barrier membrane. The membranes can be divided according to the biodegradability of the base material into absorbable membranes and non-absorbable membranes. The use of absorbable membranes is extremely widespread due to their advantages, but in clinical situations of significant tissue loss, the use of non-absorbable membranes is often still preferred. This descriptive review presents a synthesis of the types of barrier membranes available and their characteristics, as well as future trends in the development of barrier membranes along with some allergological aspects of membrane use.

Finding the Perfect Membrane: Current Knowledge on Barrier Membranes in Regenerative Procedures: A Descriptive Review

Guided tissue regeneration (GTR) and guided bone regeneration (GBR) became common procedures in the corrective phase of periodontal treatment. In order to obtain good quality tissue neo-formation, most techniques require the use of a membrane that will act as a barrier, having as a main purpose the blocking of cell invasion from the gingival epithelium and connective tissue into the newly formed bone structure. Different techniques and materials have been developed, aiming to obtain the perfect barrier membrane. The membranes can be divided according to the biodegradability of the base material into absorbable membranes and non-absorbable membranes. The use of absorbable membranes is extremely widespread due to their advantages, but in clinical situations of significant tissue loss, the use of non-absorbable membranes is often still preferred. This descriptive review presents a synthesis of the types of barrier membranes available and their characteristics, as well as future trends in the development of barrier membranes along with some allergological aspects of membrane use.

Regeneration of gingival tissue using in situ tissue engineering with collagen scaffold

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to evaluate 2 types of collagen scaffold for gingival regeneration.

STUDY DESIGN

Two types of collagen scaffolds, CS-pH7.4 and CS-pH3.0, were prepared by processing atelocollagen at pH 7.4 or 3.0, respectively, followed by dehydrothermal treatment. Gingival wounds with sizes of 4 × 6 mm (rectangle) or 6 mm diameter (circle) were made with buccal incisions in beagle dogs. The defective area was surgically covered with the CS-pH7.4, CS-pH3.0, or no scaffold (control). Gingival regeneration was assessed by monitoring the differences in the lengths of the epithelial and submucosal tissues at the wound site and the normal site. Histopathologic assessments were performed by 4 evaluators independently; statistical significance was evaluated by using the Wald test.

RESULTS

Significantly higher recovery of epithelial and submucosal tissues, which, in turn, resulted in recovery of gum thickness, was observed in gingival wounds treated with the CS-pH7.4 compared with that in the control. CS-pH3.0 treatment also resulted in higher gingival regeneration compared with the control; however, the effects were more pronounced in wounds treated with the CS-pH7.4. CS-pH7.4-treated wounds showed better gingival regeneration compared with the control and CS-pH3.0-treated wounds, even after adjusting for interevaluator differences using a linear mixed model.

CONCLUSIONS

CS-pH7.4 is a promising scaffold for gingival tissue regeneration.

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.