Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26174080›Full record

Trial reportClinical oral investigations2016

Three-year results following regenerative periodontal surgery of advanced intrabony defects with enamel matrix derivative alone or combined with a synthetic bone graft.

Thomas Hoffmann, Elyan Al-Machot, Jörg Meyle, Pia-Merete Jervøe-Storm, Søren Jepsen

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Thermal annealed silk fibroin membranes for periodontal guided tissue regeneration.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2019
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Thomas HoffmannDepartment of Periodontology, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Elyan Al-MachotDepartment of Periodontology, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Jörg MeyleDepartment of Periodontology, University of Giessen, Giessen, Germany.
Pia-Merete Jervøe-StormDepartment of Periodontology, Operative and Preventive Dentistry, University of Bonn, Welschnonnenstrasse 17, 53111, Bonn, Germany.
Søren JepsenDepartment of Periodontology, Operative and Preventive Dentistry, University of Bonn, Welschnonnenstrasse 17, 53111, Bonn, Germany. sjepsen@uni-bonn.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study aims to compare the clinical outcomes of a combination of enamel matrix derivatives (EMD) and a synthetic bone graft (biphasic calcium phosphate) with EMD alone in wide and deep one- and two-wall intrabony defects 36 months after treatment. MATERIAL AND

methodsThirty patients with chronic periodontitis and one wide (≥ 2 mm) and deep (≥ 4 mm) intrabony defect had been recruited in three centres in Germany. During surgery, defects were randomly assigned to EMD/synthetic bone graft (SBG) (test) or EMD (control). Assessments at baseline, after 6, 12 and 36 months, included bone sounding, relative clinical attachment levels, probing pocket depths and recessions.

resultsAfter 36 months, defects in both groups were significantly improved (p < 0.001) with regard to defect fill, attachment gain and probing pocket reduction. In the EMD/SBG group, a mean defect fill of 2.6 mm (±1.7) was measured, and in the EMD group, the defect fill was 2.3 mm (±1.5). A mean gain in clinical attachment of 4.1 mm (±3.6) and 3.8 mm (±2.2) was observed in the test and in the control group, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in any of the investigated parameters between the two treatment modalities.

conclusionsThe clinical improvements of advanced intrabony defects obtained with both regenerative modalities could be maintained over a period of 3 years. The combination of EMD with SBG did not show any advantage compared to the use of EMD alone.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAlveolar Bone LossBone RegenerationBone SubstitutesBone TransplantationDental Enamel ProteinsFemaleGermanyGuided Tissue Regeneration, PeriodontalHumansHydroxyapatitesMaleMiddle AgedPeriodontal IndexBone SubstitutesDental Enamel Proteinsenamel matrix proteinshydroxyapatite-beta tricalcium phosphateHydroxyapatitesBone replacement graftEnamel matrix derivativeIntrabony defectsRandomized clinical trialRegenerative periodontal therapy

Identifiers

PMID26174080

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.