Abstract This study aimed to evaluate the influence of two minimally invasive surgical protocols – with different approaches to papilla management – on regenerative outcomes achieved using enamel matrix derivative in combination with bone grafts. Materials and Methods Two treatment groups were analyzed, comprising a total of 19 patients diagnosed with advanced periodontitis. Group 1 included 11 patients contributing 14 vertical bone defects, treated with a combination of enamel matrix derivative (EMD) and xenograft. Group 2 consisted of 8 patients, also with 14 vertical defects, treated with EMD and allograft. The comparison between the two groups was based on three clinical parameters assessed at the 6-month follow-up: residual probing pocket depth, clinical attachment gain, and residual bone defect depth. The Shapiro–Wilk test was used to assess data distribution. Depending on normality and variance, intergroup comparisons were performed using either the Mann–Whitney U test or Welch’s t-test. Results Both treatment groups demonstrated similar clinical improvements at 6 months, with no statistically significant differences in residual probing pocket depth, clinical attachment gain, or residual bone defect depth. Conclusion At the 6-month follow-up, both minimally invasive surgical approaches yielded comparable clinical and radiographic outcomes. Further long-term studies are warranted to assess the potential emergence of differences in soft tissue stability and clinical parameters over time.
Maynalovska et al. (Sun,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: