Effects of expanded polytetrafluoroethylene and polylactic acid barriers on healthy sites.
The configuration of the barrier devices to treat interproximal defects by guided tissue regeneration (GTR) necessitates inclusion of healthy adjacent teeth to secure the barriers in place. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) and polylactic acid (PLA) barrier devices on probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), and crestal bone height in healthy sites. The study included 30 patients who were in an earlier study which compared the effects of GTR utilizing an ePTFE or a PLA barrier in intrabony defects. Thirty defects were randomly assigned to receive either a PLA (test) or an ePTFE barrier (control) after open flap debridement. The sites in this investigation included those healthy sites in the immediately adjacent non-affected teeth covered by the barriers. CAL and PD were measured at baseline and 12 months. Intrasurgical crestal bone height was recorded at the time of barrier placement and at a 12-month re-entry. Two-sample t-test comparisons of PD and CAL measurements between barrier device covered sites at baseline (PD: ePTFE, 2.32+/-0.51; PLA, 2.59+/-0.74; CAL: ePTFE, 2.71+/-0.66; PLA, 2.59+/-0.65 mm), and at one year (PD: ePTFE, 2.14+/-0.37; PLA, 2.07+/-0.56; CAL: ePTFE, 3.14+/-1.05; PLA, 2.75+/-0.73 mm) were not statistically different (P > 0.05). Paired t-test was utilized to compare changes in PD, CAL, and crestal bone height from baseline to 12 months. A statistically significant reduction in PD was found in the PLA group (delta = -0.52, P = 0.01) while no significant change was found in the ePTFE group (delta = -0.18, P = 0.18). Change in CAL was statistically significant in the ePTFE group (delta = 0.43, P = 0.02) while no significant change was found in the PLA group (delta = 0.16, P = 0.39). Crestal bone height changes from baseline to 12 months were statistically different for both groups (ePTFE, delta = 0.8 mm, P = 0.001; PLA, delta = 0.6 mm, P = 0.001). These resorptive changes, when compared between treatment groups were not statistically different (P > 0.05). In conclusion, the placement of ePTFE or PLA barriers on healthy sites resulted in probing depth reductions and loss of attachment of 0.5 mm or less. Additionally, both groups exhibited less than 1.0 mm of crestal bone resorption.
Trejo
P M
PM
The University of Texas, Health Science Center, Department of Stomatology, Houston 77030-3402, USA. ptrejo@bite.db.uth.tmc.edu
Weltman
R
R
Caffesse
R G
RG
D000328:Adult; D016301:Alveolar Bone Loss / Q000473:pathology; D000539:Alveolar Process / Q000473:pathology*; D003646:Debridement; D004846:Epithelial Attachment / Q000473:pathology; D005069:Evaluation Studies as Topic; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D017823:Furcation Defects / Q000601:surgery*; D016557:Guided Tissue Regeneration, Periodontal / Q000295:instrumentation*; D006801:Humans; D019344:Lactic Acid; D008297:Male; D008567:Membranes, Artificial; D008875:Middle Aged; D017622:Periodontal Attachment Loss / Q000473:pathology; D010514:Periodontal Pocket / Q000473:pathology; D010519:Periodontium / Q000473:pathology*; D011091:Polyesters; D011108:Polymers; D011138:Polytetrafluoroethylene; D013524:Surgical Flaps; D019237:Tooth Cervix / Q000473:pathology
D008567:Membranes, Artificial; D011091:Polyesters; D011108:Polymers; D019344:Lactic Acid; C033616:poly(lactide); D011138:Polytetrafluoroethylene