Tonetti Maurizio S, Cortellini Pierpaolo, Lang Niklaus P, Suvan Jean E, Adriaens Patrick, Dubravec Dominik, Fonzar Alberto, Fourmousis Ioannis, Rasperini Giulio, Rossi Roberto, Silvestri Maurizio, Topoll Heinz, Wallkamm Beat, Zybutz Michael
Department of Periodontology, Eastman Dental Institute, University College London, London, UK.
J Clin Periodontol. 2004 Sep;31(9):770-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2004.00562.x.
This prospective multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial was designed to compare the clinical outcomes of papilla preservation flap surgery with or without the application of a guided tissue regeneration (GTR)/bone replacement material.
One hundred and twenty-four patients with advanced chronic periodontitis were recruited in 10 centers in seven countries. All patients had at least one intrabony defect of > or = 3 mm. The surgical procedures included access for root instrumentation using either the simplified or the modified papilla preservation flap in order to obtain optimal tissue adaptation and primary closure. After debridement, the regenerative material was applied in the test subjects, and omitted in the controls. At baseline and 1 year following the interventions, clinical attachment levels (CALs), probing pocket depths (PPDs), recession, full-mouth plaque scores and full-mouth bleeding scores (FMBS) were assessed.
One year after treatment, the test defects gained 3.3 +/- 1.7 mm of CAL, while the control defects yielded a significantly lower CAL gain of 2.5 +/- 1.5 mm. Pocket reduction was also significantly higher in the test group (3.7 +/- 1.8 mm) when compared with the controls (3.2 +/- 1.5 mm). A multivariate analysis indicated that the treatment, the clinical centers, baseline PPD and baseline FMBS significantly influenced CAL gains. Odds ratios (ORs) of achieving above-median CAL gains were significantly improved by the test procedure (OR = 2.6, 95% CI 1.2-5.4) and by starting with deeper PPD (OR = 1.7, 1.3-2.2) but were decreased by receiving treatment at the worst-performing clinical center (OR = 0.9, 0.76-0.99).
The results of this trial indicated that regenerative periodontal surgery with a GTR/bone replacement material offers an additional benefit in terms of CAL gains, PPD reductions and predictability of outcomes with respect to papilla preservation flaps alone.
本前瞻性多中心随机对照临床试验旨在比较应用或不应用引导组织再生(GTR)/骨替代材料的乳头保留瓣手术的临床疗效。
在7个国家的10个中心招募了124例晚期慢性牙周炎患者。所有患者至少有一处≥3mm的骨内缺损。手术步骤包括使用简化或改良乳头保留瓣进行牙根器械操作通路,以实现最佳组织贴合和一期缝合。清创后,试验组应用再生材料,对照组不应用。在干预前的基线和干预后1年,评估临床附着水平(CAL)、探诊袋深度(PPD)、牙龈退缩、全口菌斑评分和全口出血评分(FMBS)。
治疗1年后,试验组缺损的CAL增加了3.3±1.7mm,而对照组缺损的CAL增加明显较低,为2.5±1.5mm。试验组的袋深减少量(3.7±1.8mm)也显著高于对照组(3.2±1.5mm)。多因素分析表明,治疗、临床中心、基线PPD和基线FMBS对CAL增加有显著影响。试验组(优势比[OR]=2.6,95%可信区间[CI]1.2-5.4)和起始PPD较深(OR=1.7,1.3-2.2)使CAL增加高于中位数的OR显著提高,但在表现最差的临床中心接受治疗使OR降低(OR=0.9,0.76-0.99)。
本试验结果表明,与单纯乳头保留瓣相比,采用GTR/骨替代材料的牙周再生手术在CAL增加、PPD减少和预后可预测性方面具有额外的益处。