OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of demineralized bone matrix (DMBM), an osteoconductive and osteoinductive graft material, as a bone graft for the treatment of osseous defects, both clinically and radiographically. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The effectiveness of DMBM was assessed at 40 sites in 30 patients who had infrabony defects. Grafted test sites were compared with control sites treated with open-flap debridement. RESULTS: Significant improvement in all variables was found, including reduction of probing depth, and gain in clinical attachment level and bone fill for test and control sites at 3 months and 6 months postoperatively. For test sites, reduction of probing depth was 2.80 mm at 3 months and 4.05 mm at 6 months, and for control sites, 1.75 mm at 3 months and 2.65 mm at 6 months. Gain in the level of clinical attachment for test sites was 2.80 mm at 3 months and 4.00 mm at 6 months; for control sites, this gain was 1.75 mm at 3 months and 2.60 mm at 6 months. The mean amount of defect resolution was 2.02 mm and 3.27 mm for test sites and 0.82 mm and 1.17 mm for control sites, at 3 months and 6 months, respectively. The mean percentage of defect resolution was 37.1% and 56.5% for test sites compared with 20.5% and 28.6% for control sites, at3 months and 6 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: DMBM improves healing outcomes, namely, reduction of probing depth, resolution of osseous defects and gain in clinical attachment, compared with open flap debridement.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of demineralized bone matrix (DMBM), an osteoconductive and osteoinductive graft material, as a bone graft for the treatment of osseous defects, both clinically and radiographically. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The effectiveness of DMBM was assessed at 40 sites in 30 patients who had infrabony defects. Grafted test sites were compared with control sites treated with open-flap debridement. RESULTS: Significant improvement in all variables was found, including reduction of probing depth, and gain in clinical attachment level and bone fill for test and control sites at 3 months and 6 months postoperatively. For test sites, reduction of probing depth was 2.80 mm at 3 months and 4.05 mm at 6 months, and for control sites, 1.75 mm at 3 months and 2.65 mm at 6 months. Gain in the level of clinical attachment for test sites was 2.80 mm at 3 months and 4.00 mm at 6 months; for control sites, this gain was 1.75 mm at 3 months and 2.60 mm at 6 months. The mean amount of defect resolution was 2.02 mm and 3.27 mm for test sites and 0.82 mm and 1.17 mm for control sites, at 3 months and 6 months, respectively. The mean percentage of defect resolution was 37.1% and 56.5% for test sites compared with 20.5% and 28.6% for control sites, at3 months and 6 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS:DMBM improves healing outcomes, namely, reduction of probing depth, resolution of osseous defects and gain in clinical attachment, compared with open flap debridement.