Table 6.
Periodontal bony pocket with primary outcome measure related to new bone formation (mean ± SD, 95% CI, and P value).
| Studies | Intervention group | N | Measurement methods | Follow-up (month) | Control group (C) | Test group (T) | Power of statistic |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pradeep AR et al., 2016 (RCT) | T1: Platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) + HA + Open flap debridement (OFD) | Radiographic by intra oral periapical/IOPA (bone defect fill) | 9 | 10.09 ± 4.28% | T1: 54.69 ± 1.93% T2: 61.94 ± 3.54% |
Pval < 0.001 | |
| T2: RSV gel + PRF + HA + OFD | 36 | ||||||
| C: OFD + Placebo gel | 37 | ||||||
| Debnath T et al., 2014 (RCT) | T1: HA-BG (bioactive glass) + biodegradable membrane | 10 | Radiographic by intra oral periapical/IOPA (bone defect fill) | 6 | 0.9 ± 0.7% | T1: 2.6 ± 0.66% T2: 1.6 ± 0.66% |
NA |
| T2: HAP + biodegradable membrane | 10 | ||||||
| C: OFD + biodegradable membrane | 10 | ||||||
| Kumar PG et al., 2011 (CCT) | T: Alloplast containing HA (Bonelike) | 10 | Radiograph CT (defect fill) | 6 | 37.41 ± 23.63 mm | 62.59 ± 31.58 mm | P = .04 |
| C: OFD | 10 | ||||||
| Chandrashekar KT & Saxena KT, 2009 (RCT) | T: Synthetic HA + β-TCP (Biograft HT) | 13 | Radiographic by the long cone-paralleling technique (defect fill) | 3 6 |
4.200 ± 0.978 3.800 ± 0.862 |
3.667 ± 1.029 2.633 ± 0.896 |
P = 0.212 P = 0.014 (Pval < 0.01) |
| C: OFD | 13 | ||||||
| Brown GD et al., 1998 (CCT) | T1 (2 defect): Flap & HAC | 8 | Radiographic by computer assisted densitometry image analysis/CADIA (defect fill) | 12 | Flap: 32.3 ± 23.8 | HAC: 29.2 ± 31.7 DFDB: 41.9 ± 42.9 |
(Pval < 0.05) |
| T2 (2 defect): DFDB + HAC | 16 | ||||||
| Leonardis DD et al., 2013 (RCT) | T: EMD (enamel matrix derivative) + HA/β-TCP | 36 | Radiographic (bone gain) | #0–12 #0–24 |
C1: 2.32 ± 0.40 C2: 0.13 ± 0.48 C1: 3.17 ± 0.69 C2: 0.23 ± 0.55 |
T: 2.61 ± 0.49 T: 3.35 ± 0.80 |
(Pval < 0.001) |
| C1: EMD | 36 | ||||||
| C2: OFD | 36 | ||||||
| Singhal et al., 2013 | T: OFD ± β-TCP/H + barrier membrane | 6 | Radiographic (bone defect area decreased) | #0–6 | 14.08 ± 12.7% | 48.88 ± 18.61 | P = 0.009 |
| C: OFD + barrier membrane | 6 | ||||||
| Singh VP et al., 2012 (RCT) | T: nanocrystal (Nc-HA) + collagen membrane | 10 | Radiographic (defect fill gain changes) | #0–6 | 0.91 ± 0.21 | 2.07 ± 0.67 |
Pcontrol = 0.008 Ptest = 0.007 |
| C: OFD | 10 | ||||||
| Mistry S et al., 2012 (CCT) | T1: OFD + HA | 8 | Radiographic (depth of the defect) | 6 #0–6 |
9.20 ± 0.44 3.00 ± 0.71 |
T1: 9.40 ± 1.51 T2: 8.80 ± 0.83 T3: 9.40 ± 1.51 T1: 3.00 ± 0.71 T2: 4.40 ± 1.14 T3: 4.20 ± 0.44 |
P < 0.01 |
| T2: OFD + BG (Bioactive Glass) | 8 | ||||||
| T3: OFD + BG + HA | 8 | ||||||
| C: OFD | 8 | ||||||
| Assche NV et al., 2013 (RCT) | T: Straumann bone ceramic | 14 | Radiographic (depth of defect changes) | #0–6 | 1.9 ± 1.2 | 1.5 ± 1.2 | P > 0.05 |
| C: Bio-Oss | 14 | ||||||
| Pietruska M et al., 2012 (CCT) | T: OFD + NHA | 15 | Radiographic (defect depth & defect width) | #0–6 | DD: 0.6 ± 0.9 DW: 0.7 ± 0.8 |
DD: 1.8 ± 1.5 DW: 0.7 ± 0.9 |
DD: Pval < 0.05 DW: Pval < 0.001 |
| C: OFD | 15 | ||||||
| Lekovic V et al., 1990 (CCT) | T: PHA + barrier membrane (Goretex) | NA | Acrylic stent (bone level) | 6 | Vertical bone level: 0.13 ± 0.26 Horizontal Bone level: 0.13 ± 0.09 |
Vertical bone level: 2.27 ± 0.18 Horizontal Bone level: 1.60 ± 0.021 |
Pval < 0.01 |
| C: Goretex | NA (15) |
| Studies | Intervention group | N | Measurement methods | Follow-up (month) | Control group | Test group | Power of statistic |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jepsen S et al., 2008 (RCT) | T: EMD ± synthetic bone Ceramic (SBC)-HA C: EMD |
29 29 |
Bone sounding (defect fill) | #0–6 | 2.07 ± 1.2 mm | 2.01 ± 2.1 mm | P < 0.001 |
| Bowen J A et al., 1989 (CCT) | T: particulate HA C: demineralized freeze cried bone allograft (DFDBA) |
6 6 |
Radiographic by paralleling device (bone defect fill) | 6 | 61% | 53% | Pval < 0.05 |
| Lai N & Dixit J 2012 (CCT) | T: OFD + HA + own blood C1: OFD + Cissus Quadrangu laris (CQ) + saline C2: Oxidized regenerated + OFD C3: OFD |
5 5 5 5 |
Radiographic (defect fill) | 1 3 6 |
C1: 1.6 mm3 C2: 3 mm3 C3: 0.60 mm3 |
T: 3 mm3 | NA |
| Tobon SI et al., 2002 (RCT) | T1: periradicular surgery + resorbable HA (OsteoGen) C1: periradicular surgery + nonabsorbable membrane (e-PTFE) C2: periradicular surgery with Conventional technique |
8 8 8 |
Radiographic by parallel technique (bone healing by size of lesion area) | 3 6 9 12 |
NA | NA |
PT2 = 0.0002 PC1 = 0.002 PC2 = 0.1 (Pval ≤ 0.05) |
| Harris RJ, 1998 (CCT) | T: DFDB + PHA + tetracyclin C: DFDB + tetracyclin |
50 50 |
Radiographic (descriptive) | 10 | NA | Horizontal probing depth reducing 7.0 mm–2.5 mm | NA |
| Kiliq AR, 1997 (CCT) | T1: e-PTFE membrane + HA + Collagen type 1 T2: HAC C1: e-PTFE membrane C2: Conventional flap (CF) |
10 10 10 10 |
Radiographic by the parallel technique (bone level) | 6 | C1: 36% C2:15% |
T1: 43% T2: 23% |
NA |
| Bowen JA et al., 1989 (CCT) | T: Particulate HA C: DFDBA |
6 6 |
Radiographic by customized paralleling (defect fill) | 6 | 61% | 53% | Pval < 0.05 |
| Queiros L A et al., 2015 (RCT) | T1: β-TCP/HA T2: Enamel matrix derivative (EMD) + β-TCP C: EMD |
13 13 13 |
Clinically (PI/GI/RGMP/RVCAL/RHCAL/PPD) for soft tissue | 12 | Outcome measure only for soft tissue | ||