Differences in effectiveness of membrane fixation using periosteal vertical mattress and simple sling suture techniques in infrabony pocket treatment

https://doi.org/10.22146/majkedgiind.37425

Beta Widya Oktiani(1), Sri Pramestri Lastianny(2*), Ahmad Syaify(3)

(1) Department of Peridontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Universitas Lambungmangkurat, South Kalimantan Periodontics Specialty Program, Faculty of Dentistry, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta
(2) Departement of Periodontics, Faculty Of Dentistry, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta
(3) Departement of Periodontics, Faculty Of Dentistry, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


Guide tissue regeneration (GTR) is the treatment of infrabony pockets for soft and hard tissue regeneration. Membrane is used as a barrier and prevents apical migration of the cells in epithelial tissues. Membrane fixation is one of the procedures in GTR treatment because resorbed membrane is less stable. Simple sling suture technique for membrane fixation has 1 anchorage, located in coronal flap, while periosteal vertical mattress suture technique has 2 anchorages in periosteum, making it more stable. This study aimed to study the differences in the effectiveness of membrane fixation using periosteal vertical mattress suture and simple sling suture techniques in terms of probing depth, relative attachment loss, and alveolar bone height in the treatment of infrabony pockets. The samples were divided into 2 groups. The first group was open flap debridement (OFD) with demineralized freeze dried bone allograft (DFDBA) application and membrane fixation with simple sling suture, while the second group was OFD with DFDBA application and membrane fixation with periosteal vertical mattress suture, observed on day 0, 30th day, and 90th day. The results of the study showed significant differences in the probing depth and relative attachment loss (except from the 30th day to the 90th day), and there were no significant differences in the alveolar bone height from the baseline to the 90th day, between the group of membrane fixation using simple sling suture and that of periosteal vertical mattress suture techniques on flap surgery. This study concluded that membrane fixation in the treatment of infrabony pocket with periosteal vertical mattress suture technique is more effective in reducing the probing depth and relative attachment loss, but there is no difference in increasing the alveolar bone height when compared to simple sling suture technique.

Keywords


alveolar bone height; infrabony pocket; membrane fixation of simple sling suture; membrane fixation of periosteal vertical mattress suture; relative attachment loss

Full Text:

PDF


References

1. Fedi PF, Vernino AR, Gray JL. Silabus Periodonti ed.4 (terj.). Jakarta: Penerbit EGC; 2004. 167-172.


2. Manson JD, Eley BM. Buku Ajar Periodonti ed.2 (terj.). Jakarta: Hipokrates; 2012. 127.


3. Newman MG, Takei HH, Carranza FA, Klokkevold PR. Carranza‘s Clinical Periodontology, 11thed. Philadelphia: W.B.Saunders Co; 2012.127-139.


4. Urban IA, Lozada JL, Wessing B, Suarez-Lopez del Almo F, Wang HL. Vertical bone grafting and periosteal vertical mattress suture for the fixation of resorbable membranes and stabilization of particulate grafts in horizontal guided bone regeneration to achieve more predictable results. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2016; 36(2): 153-159. doi: 10.11607/prd.2627.

5. Bartold PM, Gronthos S, Ivanovski S, Fisher A, Hutmacher DW. Tissue engineered periodontal products. J Periodontal Res. 2016; 51(1): 1–15. doi: 10.1111/jre.12275


6. Wang J, Wang L, Zhou Z, Lai H, Xu P, Liao L, Wei J. Biodegradable polymer membranes applied in guided bone/tissue regeneration: a review. Polymers (Basel). 2016; 8(4): 1-5.
doi: 10.3390/polym8040115


7. Nagappa R, Elzer ASM, Younis SFB, Doddagoudar M. Surgical procedure for guided
bone regeneration using resorbable membrane barrier for ridge augmentation in successful
implant placement. Journal of Indian Academy of Dental Specialist Researchers. 2015; 2(2):
73-74. doi: 10.4103/2229-3019.177931

8. Siervo S, Lorenzini L. Suturing techniques in oral surgery. Quintessenza Edizioni S.r.l.
Milano; 2008.170-173, 222-223.

9. Sato N. Periodontal Surgery Clinical Atlas. Illinois: Quintessence Publishing; 2000. 393.


10. Agarwal A, Gupta ND. Combination of bone allograft, barrier membrane and doxycycline in
the treatment of infrabony periodontal defects: A comparative trial The Saudi Dental Journal.
2015; 27(3): 155-160.

11. Lindhe J, Lang NP, Karing. Clinical Periodontology and Implant Dentistry 5th.
United Kingdom: Blackwell Munksgaard; 2008. 57-59.

12. Goti R, Bansal M, Kaushik M. A Comparative evaluation of freezee dried bone allograft, a
clinical and radiographic study. J of Indian Soc Periodontol. 2015; 19(4): 411-415.
doi: 10.4103/0972-124X.154169.

13. Schulean A, Nikolidakasis D, Nikou G. Biomaterials for promoting periodontal
regeneration in in human intrabony defects: a systematic review. Periodontol. 2000. 2015;
68(1): 182-216. doi: 10.1111/prd.12086

14. Eickholz P, Krigar DM, Rawlison. Stability of clinical and radiographic results after GTR in
infrabony defects. J Periodontol. 2007; 78(1): 37-46. doi: 10.1902/jop.2007.060097

15. Groeneveld EH, Burger EH. Bone morphogenetic proteins in human bone regeneration. Eur J Endocrinol. 2000; 142(1): 9-21. doi: 10.1530/eje.0.1420009

16. Hallman M, lundgren S, Seneby L. Histologic analysis of clinical biopsies taken 6 months and
3 years after maxillary sinus floor augmentation with 80% bovine hydroxyapatite and 20%
autogenous bone mixed with fibrin glue. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2001; 3(2): 87-96.
doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2001.tb00236.x



DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/majkedgiind.37425

Article Metrics

Abstract views : 2462 | views : 3231

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Copyright (c) 2019 Majalah Kedokteran Gigi Indonesia

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.


 

 View My Stats


real
time web analytics