Within its limits the present analysis indicates that: (a) The combination of barrier membranes and grafting materials may result in histological evidence of periodontal regeneration, predominantly bone repair. (b) No additional benefits of combination treatments were detected in models of three wall intrabony, Class II furcation or fenestration defects. (c) In supra-alveolar and two wall intrabony (missing buccal wall) defect models of periodontal regeneration, the additional use of a grafting material gave superior histological results of bone repair to barrier membranes alone. (d) In one study using a supra-alveolar model, combined graft and barrier membrane gave a superior result to graft alone.

Background A newly developed collagen matrix (CM) of porcine origin has been shown to represent a potential alternative to palatal connective tissue grafts (CTG) for the treatment of single Miller Class I and II gingival recessions when used in conjunction with a coronally advanced flap (CAF). However, at present it remains unknown to what extent CM may represent a valuable alternative to CTG in the treatment of Miller Class I and II multiple adjacent gingival recessions (MAGR). The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes following treatment of Miller Class I and II MAGR using the modified coronally advanced tunnel technique (MCAT) in conjunction with either CM or CTG. Methods Twenty‐two patients with a total of 156 Miller Class I and II gingival recessions were included in this study. Recessions were randomly treated according to a split‐mouth design by means of MCAT + CM (test) or MCAT + CTG (control). The following measurements were recorded at baseline (i.e. prior to surgery) and at 12 months: Gingival Recession Depth (GRD), Probing Pocket Depth (PD), Clinical Attachment Level (CAL), Keratinized Tissue Width (KTW), Gingival Recession Width (GRW) and Gingival Thickness (GT). GT was measured 3‐mm apical to the gingival margin. Patient acceptance was recorded using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). The primary outcome variable was Complete Root Coverage (CRC), secondary outcomes were Mean Root Coverage (MRC), change in KTW, GT, patient acceptance and duration of surgery. Results Healing was uneventful in both groups. No adverse reactions at any of the sites were observed. At 12 months, both treatments resulted in statistically significant improvements of CRC, MRC, KTW and GT compared with baseline (p < 0.05). CRC was found at 42% of test sites and at 85% of control sites respectively (p < 0.05). MRC measured 71 ± 21% mm at test sites versus 90 ± 18% mm at control sites (p < 0.05). Mean KTW measured 2.4 ± 0.7 mm at test sites versus 2.7 ± 0.8 mm at control sites (p > 0.05). At test sites, GT values changed from 0.8 ± 0.2 to 1.0 ± 0.3 mm, and at control sites from 0.8 ± 0.3 to 1.3 ± 0.4 mm (p < 0.05). Duration of surgery and patient morbidity was statistically significantly lower in the test compared with the control group respectively (p < 0.05). Conclusions The present findings indicate that the use of CM may represent an alternative to CTG by reducing surgical time and patient morbidity, but yielded lower CRC than CTG in the treatment of Miller Class I and II MAGR when used in conjunction with MCAT.

One-year results indicate that the modified tunnel/CTG technique is predictable for the treatment of multiple class III recession-type defects. The addition of EMD does not enhance the mean clinical outcomes.

Intrabony periodontal defects are a frequent complication of periodontitis and, if left untreated, may negatively affect long‐term tooth prognosis. The optimal outcome of treatment in intrabony defects is considered to be the absence of bleeding on probing, the presence of shallow pockets associated with periodontal regeneration (i.e. formation of new root cementum with functionally orientated inserting periodontal ligament fibers connected to new alveolar bone) and no soft‐tissue recession. A plethora of different surgical techniques, often including implantation of various types of bone graft and/or bone substitutes, root surface demineralization, guided tissue regeneration, growth and differentiation factors, enamel matrix proteins or various combinations thereof, have been employed to achieve periodontal regeneration. Despite positive observations in animal models and successful outcomes reported for many of the available regenerative techniques and materials in patients, including histologic reports, robust information on the degree to which reported clinical improvements reflect true periodontal regeneration does not exist. Thus, the aim of this review was to summarize, in a systematic manner, the available histologic evidence on the effect of reconstructive periodontal surgery using various types of biomaterials to enhance periodontal wound healing/regeneration in human intrabony defects. In addition, the inherent problems associated with performing human histologic studies and in interpreting the results, as well as certain ethical considerations, are discussed. The results of the present systematic review indicate that periodontal regeneration in human intrabony defects can be achieved to a variable extent using a range of methods and materials. Periodontal regeneration has been observed following the use of a variety of bone grafts and substitutes, guided tissue regeneration, biological factors and combinations thereof. Combination approaches appear to provide the best outcomes, whilst implantation of alloplastic material alone demonstrated limited, to no, periodontal regeneration.

Recent preclinical and clinical data have suggested the potential benefit of photodynamic therapy (PDT) in the treatment of periodontitis. However, currently, there are very limited data from controlled clinical trials evaluating the effect of PDT in the treatment of periodontitis. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinical and microbiological effects of the adjunctive use of PDT in non-surgical periodontal treatment in patients receiving supportive periodontal therapy. Twenty-four patients receiving regularly supportive periodontal therapy were randomly treated with either subgingival scaling and root planing followed by a single episode of PDT (test) or subgingival scaling and root planing alone (control). The following parameters were evaluated at baseline and at 3 months and 6 months after therapy: full mouth plaque score (FMPS), full mouth bleeding score (FMBS), bleeding on probing (BOP) at experimental sites, probing pocket depth (PPD), gingival recession (REC), and clinical attachment level (CAL). Primary outcome variables were changes in PPD and CAL. Microbiological evaluation of Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans (A.a.), Porphyromonas gingivalis (P.g.), Prevotella intermedia (P.i.), Tannerella forsythensis (T.f.), Treponema denticola (T.d.), Peptostreptococcus micros (P.m.), Fusobacterium nucleatum (F.n.), Campylobacter rectus (C.r.), Eubacterium nodatum (E.n.), Eikenella corrodens (E.c.), and Capnocytophaga species (C.s.) was also performed at baseline and at 3 months and 6 months after therapy, using a commercially available polymerase chain reaction test. No differences in any of the investigated parameters were observed at baseline between the two groups. At 3 months and 6 months after treatment, there were no statistically significant differences between the groups in terms of PPD, CAL and FMPS. At 3 months and 6 months, a statistically significantly higher improvement of BOP was found in the test group. At 3 months after therapy, the microbiological analysis showed a statistically significant reduction of F.n. and E.n. in the test group. At 6 months, statistically significantly higher numbers of E.c. and C.s. were detected in the test group. The additional application of a single episode of PDT to scaling and root planing failed to result in an additional improvement in terms of PPD reduction and CAL gain, but it resulted in significantly higher reduction of bleeding scores than following scaling and root planing alone.