Advanced search
Start date
Betweenand
Related content
(Reference retrieved automatically from Web of Science through information on FAPESP grant and its corresponding number as mentioned in the publication by the authors.)

Connective tissue graft as a biological barrier for guided tissue regeneration in intrabony defects: a histological study in dogs

Full text
Author(s):
Ribeiro, Fernando Salimon [1] ; Farias Pontes, Ana Emilia [1] ; Zuza, Elizangela Partata [1] ; da Silva, Vanessa Camila [2] ; Comelli Lia, Raphael Carlos [1] ; Marcantonio Junior, Elcio [3]
Total Authors: 6
Affiliation:
[1] Educ Fdn Barretos UNIFEB, Sch Dent, Dept Master Dent Sci, BR-14783226 Barretos, SP - Brazil
[2] Fed Univ Maranhao UFMA, Sch Dent, Dept Dent 2, Maranhao, MA - Brazil
[3] Sao Paulo State Univ UNESP, Sch Dent, Dept Diag & Surg, Araraquara, SP - Brazil
Total Affiliations: 3
Document type: Journal article
Source: CLINICAL ORAL INVESTIGATIONS; v. 19, n. 5, p. 997-1004, JUN 2015.
Web of Science Citations: 0
Abstract

Background The use of the autogenous periosteal graft as biological barrier has been proposed for periodontal regeneration. The aim of this study was to evaluate the histometric findings of the subepithelial connective tissue graft as barrier in intrabony defects compared to a bioabsorbable membrane. Methods Three-walled intrabony defects were created surgically in the mesial aspect of the right and left maxillary canines in five healthy mongrel dogs. The defects were chronified, and two types of barriers were randomly carried out for guided tissue regeneration in a split-mouth design: the test group with a subepithelial connective tissue graft and the control group with a bioabsorbable membrane. The specimens were processed for histometric analyses of the epithelium (E), connective tissue (CT), newly formed cementum (NC), new bone (NB), and total newly formed tissues (NFT). Results The test side showed smaller mean of NC (3.6 +/- 1.2), NB (2.1 +/- 0.7), and NFT (7.7 +/- 0.8) than the control group (NC 7.3 +/- 0.5; NB 5.3 +/- 1.3; NFT 10.1 +/- 2.2; P<0.05). No statistically significant differences were verified for E (test 3.1 +/- 2.0; control 2.8 +/- 2.1; P>0.05) and CT (test 2.5 +/- 1.1; control 2.0 +/- 0.5; P>0.05) between groups. Conclusion The bioabsorbable membrane was more effective in maintaining the space for periodontal regeneration than periosteal connective graft when used as barrier. Clinical relevance The bioabsorbable membrane showed more favorable regenerative results in intrabony defects in dogs than the subepithelial connective tissue graft as biological barrier. (AU)