Clinical evaluation of the use of enamel matrix derivative and hydroxyapatite 'beta' tricalcium phosphate composite in the treatment of class II proximal furcation defects

Author(s)

Maria Fernanda Santos Peres

• Document type: Master's Dissertation
• Press: Piracicaba, SP.
• Institution: Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP). Faculdade de Odontologia de Piracicaba
• Defense date: 2011-02-28

Examining board members

Marcio Zaffalon Casati; Giuseppe Alexandre Romito; Karina Gonzales Silverio

• Advisor: Renato Corrêa Viana Casarin; Marcio Zaffalon Casati

Abstract

The aim of the present prospective, randomized, double blinded trial was to clinically evaluate the use of hydroxyapatite /ß- tricalcium phosphate (HA/ ß- TCP) isolated or in combination with enamel matrix derivative (EMD) in the treatment of proximal class II furcation defects. 30 patients, presenting at least one proximal class II furcation defect, probing depth ?5 mm and bleeding on probing after basic therapy were included. The furcation defects were randomly assigned to receive one of the following treatments: control (n=15): open flap debridement (OFD) + HA/ß-TCP (BoneCeramic, Straumann®) filling, or, test (n=15): OFD + HA/?-TCP (BoneCeramic, Straumann®) + EMD (Emdogain, Straumann®) filling. The following clinical parameters were evaluated at baseline and after 6 months: plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), probing depth (PD), gingival margin position (RGMP), relative vertical and horizontal attachment level (RVAL and RHAL), relative vertical and horizontal bone level (RVBL and RHBL) and furcation diagnosis. After six months, the gain of RVAL of control and test group were 1.47 e 2.10mm, while the RHAL gain were 1.47 and 1.57mm, bonth without statistical difference between the groups. The RVBL and RHBL gain of control and test group were 1.47 e 1.70mm, and 1.90 e 1.70mm respectively, also without statistical difference. The diagnosis of furcation lesion evaluation showed 7 closed furcations in test group, while in control group 4 lesions were observed. It could be concluded that both treatments might be a viable alternative to the treatment of proximal class II furcation defects, once both are capable to promote clinical benefits in all parameters evaluated and partial or complete furcation defect resolution (AU)