Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2156292011> ?p ?o ?g. }
- W2156292011 abstract "Background Periodontitis is a chronic infective disease of the gums caused by bacteria present in dental plaque. This condition induces the breakdown of the tooth supporting apparatus until teeth are lost. Surgery may be indicated to arrest disease progression and regenerate lost tissues. Several surgical techniques have been developed to regenerate periodontal tissues including guided tissue regeneration (GTR), bone grafting (BG) and the use of enamel matrix derivative (EMD). EMD is an extract of enamel matrix and contains amelogenins of various molecular weights. Amelogenins are involved in the formation of enamel and periodontal attachment formation during tooth development. Objectives To test whether EMD is effective, and to compare EMD versus GTR, and various BG procedures for the treatment of intrabony defects. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE. Several journals were handsearched. No language restrictions were applied. Authors of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) identified, personal contacts and the manufacturer were contacted to identify unpublished trials. Most recent search: February 2009. Selection criteria RCTs on patients affected by periodontitis having intrabony defects of at least 3 mm treated with EMD compared with open flap debridement, GTR and various BG procedures with at least 1 year follow up. The outcome measures considered were: tooth loss, changes in probing attachment levels (PAL), pocket depths (PPD), gingival recessions (REC), bone levels from the bottom of the defects on intraoral radiographs, aesthetics and adverse events. The following time‐points were to be evaluated: 1, 5 and 10 years. Data collection and analysis Screening of eligible studies, assessment of the methodological quality of the trials and data extraction were conducted in duplicate and independently by two authors. Results were expressed as random‐effects models using mean differences for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). It was decided not to investigate heterogeneity, but a sensitivity analysis for the risk of bias of the trials was performed. Main results Thirteen trials were included out of 35 potentially eligible trials. No included trial presented data after 5 years of follow up, therefore all data refer to the 1‐year time point. A meta‐analysis including nine trials showed that EMD treated sites displayed statistically significant PAL improvements (mean difference 1.1 mm, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.55) and PPD reduction (0.9 mm, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.31) when compared to placebo or control treated sites, though a high degree of heterogeneity was found. Significantly more sites had < 2 mm PAL gain in the control group, with RR 0.53 (95% CI 0.34 to 0.82). Approximately nine patients needed to be treated (NNT) to have one patient gaining 2 mm or more PAL over the control group, based on a prevalence in the control group of 25%. No differences in tooth loss or aesthetic appearance as judged by the patients were observed. When evaluating only trials at a low risk of bias in a sensitivity analysis (four trials), the effect size for PAL was 0.62 mm (95% CI 0.28 to 0.96), which was less than 1.1 mm for the overall result. Comparing EMD with GTR (five trials), GTR showed statistically significant more postoperative complications (three trials, RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.85) and more REC (0.4 mm 95% CI 0.15 to 0.66). The only trial comparing EMD with a bioactive ceramic filler found statistically significant more REC (‐1.60 mm, 95% CI ‐2.74 to ‐0.46) at the EMG treated sites. Authors' conclusions One year after its application, EMD significantly improved PAL levels (1.1 mm) and PPD reduction (0.9 mm) when compared to a placebo or control, however, the high degree of heterogeneity observed among trials suggests that results have to be interpreted with great caution. In addition, a sensitivity analysis indicated that the overall treatment effect might be overestimated. The actual clinical advantages of using EMD are unknown. With the exception of significantly more postoperative complications in the GTR group, there was no evidence of clinically important differences between GTR and EMD. Bone substitutes may be associated with less REC than EMD." @default.
- W2156292011 created "2016-06-24" @default.
- W2156292011 creator A5014331094 @default.
- W2156292011 creator A5040576917 @default.
- W2156292011 creator A5046760392 @default.
- W2156292011 creator A5067775878 @default.
- W2156292011 creator A5075097700 @default.
- W2156292011 date "2009-10-07" @default.
- W2156292011 modified "2023-10-10" @default.
- W2156292011 title "Enamel matrix derivative (Emdogain®) for periodontal tissue regeneration in intrabony defects" @default.
- W2156292011 cites W1517898854 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W1598602811 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W1620096358 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W1947434151 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W1974391990 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W1975138365 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W1978945998 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W1980678036 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W1986607683 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W1999092639 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2002297004 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2005763946 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2006878821 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2008620315 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2010480970 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2010504003 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2010605035 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2026863358 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2030983224 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2033451677 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2046109735 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2048673245 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2048816263 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2053321295 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2054342395 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2057357230 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2068741867 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2075039675 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2081757111 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2082990542 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2086731325 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2103068318 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2105919259 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2106234041 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2108440145 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2112288338 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2113095425 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2113244699 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2119363684 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2120744719 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2123895394 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2129538712 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2130235475 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2137830432 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2139189530 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2146465658 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2153801460 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2158943610 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2159092362 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2160864868 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2161135038 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2175431437 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2178670124 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2297594805 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W2398108652 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W4230871076 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W4236086913 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W4238574296 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W4246783524 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W4246800024 @default.
- W2156292011 cites W4255640111 @default.
- W2156292011 doi "https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd003875.pub3" @default.
- W2156292011 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/6786880" @default.
- W2156292011 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19821315" @default.
- W2156292011 hasPublicationYear "2009" @default.
- W2156292011 type Work @default.
- W2156292011 sameAs 2156292011 @default.
- W2156292011 citedByCount "121" @default.
- W2156292011 countsByYear W21562920112012 @default.
- W2156292011 countsByYear W21562920112013 @default.
- W2156292011 countsByYear W21562920112014 @default.
- W2156292011 countsByYear W21562920112015 @default.
- W2156292011 countsByYear W21562920112016 @default.
- W2156292011 countsByYear W21562920112017 @default.
- W2156292011 countsByYear W21562920112018 @default.
- W2156292011 countsByYear W21562920112019 @default.
- W2156292011 countsByYear W21562920112020 @default.
- W2156292011 countsByYear W21562920112021 @default.
- W2156292011 countsByYear W21562920112022 @default.
- W2156292011 countsByYear W21562920112023 @default.
- W2156292011 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
- W2156292011 hasAuthorship W2156292011A5014331094 @default.
- W2156292011 hasAuthorship W2156292011A5040576917 @default.
- W2156292011 hasAuthorship W2156292011A5046760392 @default.
- W2156292011 hasAuthorship W2156292011A5067775878 @default.
- W2156292011 hasAuthorship W2156292011A5075097700 @default.
- W2156292011 hasBestOaLocation W21562920112 @default.
- W2156292011 hasConcept C106434640 @default.
- W2156292011 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
- W2156292011 hasConcept C156887251 @default.