PubMed · 11471634
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
D J Kleier, B G Seto. 2000. Case 10.. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004770-200012000-00001
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the healing response with 3 different bone substitute materials in extraction sites in the dog. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four dogs had their mandibular and maxillary premolars extracted atraumatically. The sites were immediately grafted with anorganic bovine bone (Bio-Oss, Osteohealth, Shirley, NY), Bone Source (Leibinger, Inc, Kalamazoo, MI), or Embarc (Lorenz Surgical, Jacksonville, FL), or left untreated as a control. After 8 weeks, the sites were removed for histologic evaluation of bone fill and the healing response. RESULTS: All sites healed well without signs of infection. No significant differences were noted in the shape of the ridges between groups. The control sites had radiographic bone fill by 8 weeks. The Bio-Oss sites showed bone fill with a similar appearance to the control sites. The Bone Source and Embarc sites showed implant material taking up most of the extraction site. In all sites the control and Bio-Oss sites had significantly more bone formation than the Embarc and Bone Source sites (P <.05). The control sites contained woven bone. The Bio-Oss sites were similar to the control sites, but with remnants of Bio-Oss in the bone. The Bone Source and Embarc sites were filled predominantly with the graft material without evidence of resorption and replacement of the materials, and with minimal bone formation. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this study, the control and Bio-Oss sites were similar, with bone filling most of the extraction site. The other 2 materials did not show replacement with bone.
Regeneration of damaged periodontal tissues is mediated by periodontal cells, but a major sub-population comprises highly differentiated cells that do not renew. To overcome the loss of specialized cell types caused by disease, various therapeutic approaches including cell transplants have been developed to promote cell re-population in periodontal tissues. As previous transplantation studies used unlabeled cells, that are indistinguishable from host cells, it has been difficult to assess the contributions of transplanted cells to the healing processes. To track the fate and differentiation of rat periodontal cells transplanted into periodontal wounds, we used collagen-coated fluorescent beads as a permanent endocytosed marker, or cells constitutively expressing beta-galactosidase. We assessed osteogenic cell differentiation with immunohistochemical staining for osteopontin and bone sialoprotein. Cells were transplanted into periodontal wounds created in Sprague--Dawley male rats that are null for beta-galactosidase. Defects were allowed to heal spontaneously (controls), or were closed with collagen implants mixed with beta-galactosidase-positive (Lac-Z) periodontal cells, or closed with collagen implants mixed with periodontal cells loaded with fluorescent beads. Animals were killed at 1 and 2 weeks after surgery and tissues were prepared for morphometric assessment and immunostaining for osteopontin (OPN) and bone sialoprotein (BSP). Transplanted cells were easily distinguished by fluorescent beads or by beta-galactosidase-positive expression and were distributed throughout the regenerating periodontal ligament (PL) and alveolar bone. At 1 week after wounding, animals treated with beta-galactosidase-positive cells exhibited a slightly higher percentage of labeled cells in the PL compared with the fluorescent bead-labeled cell implant group (2% vs. 1% respectively; P > 0.2). At Week 2 percentages of labeled cells were slightly increased in the regenerating PL (approximately 3% for both groups, P > 0.2). In regenerating alveolar bone at 1 week, animals that were treated with beta-galactosidase-positive cells and fluorescent bead-loaded cells exhibited approximately 30% and 25% of labeled cells respectively. At 2 weeks after wounding there was an increase in the percentage of transplanted beta-galactosidase-positive cells (approximately 39% at week 2; P < 0.05), but not of transplanted cells with fluorescent beads (approximately 25% at week 2). In sites with transplanted cells there were higher percentages of OPN positive and BSP positive cells in nascent bone and more newly formed bone than in controls (>40%; P < 0.05). Transplantation of beta-galactosidase-positive cells or cells loaded with fluorescent beads is a useful method for assessing the fate and differentiation of periodontal cells in vivo. Fluorescent beads, however, are diluted at mitosis and this method underestimates the percentage of transplanted cells. As transplanted periodontal cells in both groups promoted regeneration of alveolar bone, cell transplantation could improve the restoration of periodontium destroyed by periodontitis.
BACKGROUND: Conventional treatment of destructive periodontal (gum) disease arrests the disease but does not regain the bone support or connective tissue lost in the disease process. Guided tissue regeneration (GTR) is a surgical procedure that aims to regenerate the periodontal tissues when the disease is advanced and could overcome some of the limitations of conventional therapy. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of GTR in the treatment of periodontal infra-bony defects measured against the current standard of surgical periodontal treatment, open flap debridement. SEARCH STRATEGY: We conducted an electronic search of the Cochrane Oral Health Group specialised trials register and MEDLINE up to October 2000. Hand searching included Journal of Periodontology, Journal of Clinical Periodontology, Journal of Periodontal Research and bibliographies of all relevant papers and review articles up to October 2000. In addition, we contacted experts/groups/companies involved in surgical research to find other trials or unpublished material or to clarify ambiguous or missing data and posted requests for data on two periodontal electronic discussion groups. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised, controlled trials of at least 12 months duration comparing guided tissue regeneration (with or without graft materials) with open flap debridement for the treatment of periodontal infra-bony defects. Furcation involvements and studies specifically treating early onset diseases were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Screening of possible studies was conducted independently by two reviewers (RT & IN) and data abstraction by three reviewers (RT, IN & EGL). The methodological quality of studies was assessed in duplicate (RT & IN) using both individual components and a quality scale (Jadad 1998) and agreement determined by Kappa scores. Methodological quality was used in sensitivity analyses to test the robustness of the conclusions. The Cochrane Oral Health Group statistical guidelines were followed (HW) and the results expressed as weighted mean differences (WMD and 95% CI) for continuous outcomes and relative risk (RR and 95% CI) for dichotomous outcomes calculated using random effects models where significant heterogeneity was detected (P < 0.1). The final analysis was conducted using STATA 6 in order to combine both parallel group studies and intra-individual (split-mouth) studies. The primary outcome measure was gain in clinical attachment. Any heterogeneity was investigated. MAIN RESULTS: We initially included 23 trial reports. Twelve were subsequently excluded. Of these, seven presented six-months data only, three were not fully randomised controlled trials, one used a non-comparable radiographic technique. Eleven studies were finally included in the review, ten testing GTR alone and two testing GTR+bone substitutes (one study had both test treatment arms). For attachment level change, the weighted mean difference between GTR alone and open flap debridement was 1.11 mm (95% CI: 0.63 to 1.59), chi-square for heterogeneity 31.4 (df = 9), p<0.001) and for GTR+bone substitutes was 1.25 mm (95% CI: 0.89 to 1.61, chi-square for heterogeneity 0.01 (df = 1), p=0.91). GTR showed a significant benefit when comparing the numbers of sites failing to gain 2 mm attachment, with relative risk 0.58 (95% CI: 0.38, 0.88, chi-square for heterogeneity 5.72 (df = 3), p=0.13). The number needed to treat (NNT) for GTR to achieve one extra site gaining 2 mm or more attachment over open flap debridement was 8 (95% CI: 4, 33), based on an incidence of 32% of sites in the control group failing to gain 2 mm or more of attachment. For baseline incidences in the range of the control groups of 10% and 55% the NNTs are 24 and 3. Probing depth reduction demonstrated a small but statistically significant benefit for GTR, weighted mean difference 0.80 mm (95% CI: 0.14,1.46, chi-square for heterogeneity 10.0 (df = 4), p=0.04) or GTR+bone substitutes, weighted mean difference 1.24 mm (95% CI: 0.89, 1.59, chi-square for heterogeneity 0.03 (df = 1), p=0.85). No significant difference was noted for gingival recession between GTR and open flap debridement. Regarding hard tissue probing at surgical re-entry, a statistically significant greater gain was found for GTR compared with open flap debridement. This amounted to a weighted mean difference of 1.39 mm (95% CI: 1.08, 1.71, chi-square for heterogeneity 0.85 (df = 2), p=0.65). For GTR+bone substitutes the difference was greater, with mean difference 3.37 mm (95% CI: 3.14, 3.61). Heterogeneity between studies was highly statistically significant for all principal comparisons and could not be explained satisfactorily by sensitivity analyses. The quality of study reporting was poor with seven out of 11 studies graded as poor using the Jadad score. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)