Trial reportClinical oral investigations2016
Enamel matrix protein derivative and/or synthetic bone substitute for the treatment of mandibular class II buccal furcation defects. A 12-month randomized clinical trial.
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 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Combination of Enamel Matrix Derivatives with Bone Graft vs Bone Graft Alone in the Treatment of Periodontal Intrabony and Furcation Defects: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Oral health & preventive dentistry · 2024Pooled it
- Three Decades of Enamel Matrix Derivative: From Dental Innovation to Extra-Oral Applications.International journal of dentistry · 2026Review
- Research progress of enamel matrix derivative on periodontal tissue regeneration: a narrative review.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2025Review
- Enamel matrix derivative monotherapy versus combination therapy with bone grafts for periodontal intrabony defects: An updated review.The Japanese dental science review · 2024Review
- From Basic Science to Clinical Practice: A Review of Current Periodontal/Mucogingival Regenerative Biomaterials.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024Review
- Latest Findings of the Regenerative Materials Application in Periodontal and Peri-Implant Surgery: A Scoping Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Enamel Matrix Derivatives for Periodontal Regeneration: Recent Developments and Future Perspectives.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2022Review
- The efficiency of using enamel matrix derivative in therapeutic approach of periodontal furcation defects of maxillary and mandibular molars.Romanian journal of morphology and embryology = Revue roumaine de morphologie et embryologieArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to clinically evaluate the treatment of mandibular class II furcation defects with enamel matrix derivative (EMD) and/or a bone substitute graft made of β-tricalcium phosphate/hydroxyapatite (βTCP/HA). MATERIALS AND
methodsForty-one patients, presenting a mandibular class II buccal furcation defect, probing pocket depth (PPD) ≥4 mm and bleeding on probing, were included. They were randomly assigned to the groups: 1-EMD (n = 13); 2-βTCP/HA (n = 14); 3-EMD + βTCP/HA (n = 14). Plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), relative gingival margin position (RGMP), relative vertical and horizontal attachment level (RVCAL and RHCAL), and PPD were evaluated at baseline and 6 and 12 months. The mean horizontal clinical attachment level gain was considered the primary outcome variable.
resultsNo significant intragroup differences were observed for RGMP, but significant changes were observed for RVCAL, RHCAL, and PPD for all groups (p < 0.05). After 12 months, the mean horizontal clinical attachment level gain was 2.77 ± 0.93 mm for EMD, 2.64 ± 0.93 mm for βTCP/HA, and 2.93 ± 0.83 mm for EMD + βTCP/HA, with no significant differences among the groups. At the end of the study, 85.3 % of the sites were partially closed; however, no complete closure was observed.
conclusionEMD + βTCP/HA does not provide a significant advantage when compared to the isolated approaches. All three tested treatments promote significant improvements and partial closure of class II buccal furcation defects. Based on its potential to induce periodontal regeneration, EMD may be considered an attractive option for this type of defect, but complete closure remains an unrealistic goal. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The partial closure of buccal furcation defects can be achieved after the three tested approaches. However, the combined treatment does not provide a significant benefit when compared to the isolated approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26556577What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.