Are Results for Enamel Matrix Derivative (Emdogain) comparable to Connective Tissue Grafting at 10 years?

Methods:

10 years after the original surgery for gingival recession, 10 of 17 patients were returned for follow-up evaluation. Among the parameters measured at 10 years: Percent root coverage, gingival recession depth, probing depths , width of keratinized tissue and clinical attachment levels.

Results:

No difference between Emdogain and Coronally Advanced Flap when compared to Connective Tissue and Coronally Advanced Flap for all measured parameters.  

Conclusions:

Both procedures are equally clinically effective and stable at 10 years for the treatment of Miller class I and II recession defects.

Dr. Gabrael’s comments:

Important long term data. Gains in root coverage appear stable at 10 years for both treatment modalities.

                                                                                                                                                     

for more information refer to:

Evaluation of human recession defects treated with coronally advanced flaps and either enamel matrix derivative or connective tissue: Comparison of clinical parameters at 10 years.

Journal of Periodontology November 2012, Vol.83, No.11, Pages 1353- 1362

 

2 thoughts on “Are Results for Enamel Matrix Derivative (Emdogain) comparable to Connective Tissue Grafting at 10 years?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *