الفهرس 
Clinical and radiographic evaluation of papilla preservation flap with or without Nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite bone graft for management of periodontal intrabony defects
ABSTRACTOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 166 |  |  |
| | | from | 166 | | |
Abstract
Aim: This study was meant to assess clinically and radiographically the possible predictable results regarding the use of nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite bone graft substitute together with papilla preservation flap versus papilla preservation flap alone in the treatment of periodontal intrabony defects. Methodology: Twenty four sites in 9 patients, within the age range of 25{u2013}50 years, showing intrabony defects were selected and divided into intervention group where papilla preservation flap (PPF) technique was performed whether modified (MPPF) or simplified (SPPF) with the application of nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite bone graft substitute (PPF + n-HA) and control group: where PPF technique alone was performed (MPPF or SPPF). All the selected sites were assessed with the clinical and radiographic parameters such as plaque index, gingival index, probing pocket depth, clinical attachment level, gingival recession, and radiographic bone fill (BDA). All the clinical and radiographic parameter values obtained at different intervals (baseline, 3, and 6 months) were subjected to statistical analysis. Results: In the present study, both groups showed a statistically significant reduction in PPD and gain in CAL, 3 and 6 months postoperatively compared to baseline values as well as from 3 to 6 months without any significant difference when compared to each other. The PPF+n-HA group demonstrated PPD reduction of 2.33 (±0.98) mm after 3 months and 3.67 (±1.07) mm at 6 months, while CAL gain reported were 2.08 (±1.08)mm and 3.33 (±0.89) mm at 3 and 6 months respectively