Clinical and radiographic evaluation of open flap debridement with or without Nanocrystalline Hydroxyapatite bone graft in management of periodontal intrabony defects

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Lecturer, Department of Oral Medicine and Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.

2 Associate Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt

Abstract

Abstract:

Background:
Nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite (n-HA) bone graft could improve proliferation and differentiation of periodontal ligament fibroblasts. The osteoconductive and biomimetic properties incorporated into the early stage of human physiological bone turnover assumed that deposition of these molecules promoted early osteogenesis in and around Nano Bone.
Methods:
20 periodontitis patients with intra-bony defects participated in this clinical trial and treated with either open flap debridement (OFD) alone as control group or OFD and n-HA bone graft as intervention group. Clinical outcomes included plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL) and gingival recession (GR). Bone defect area (BDA) was measured by digital periapical radiographs and linear measurements were used to calculate the radiographic bone fill. Measurements at baseline and 6-months postoperatively were subjected to statistical analysis.
Results:
Both OFD and OFD with n-HA bone substitute resulted in statistically significant improvement in all clinical and radiographic parameters from baseline to 6 months. But no significant difference was observed between both groups. After 6 months, OFD showed 2.4(±0.5)mm PD reduction and 1.2(±0.8)mm CAL gain, while n-HA group showed 3.2(±1.1)mm PD reduction and 2.7(±1.3)mm CAL gain. The BDA was reduced by 1.7(±1)mm2 with OFD and by 3.4(±2.2)mm2 in n-HA group.
Conclusion:
Both OFD and OFD with n-HA showed significant reduction in clinical and radiographic outcomes after 6 months with no statistically significant difference between them.
Clinical relevance:
Both treatment modalities are successful procedures for treating intrabony defects

Keywords

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics