The combined use of enamel matrix proteins and a tetracyclinecoated expanded polytetrafluoroethylene barrier membrane in the treatment of intra-osseous defects Sipos, P.M.; Loos, B.G.; Abbas, Frank; Timmerman, M.F.; Velden, U. van der CopyrightOther than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum. Download date: 12-05-2018The combined use of enamel matrix proteins and a tetracyclinecoated expanded polytetrafluoroethylene barrier membrane in the treatment of intra-osseous defects AbstractObjectives: The purpose of this split-mouth study was to evaluate the clinical response of enamel matrix proteins (EMPs, Emdogain Gel s ) in intra-osseous defects with or without a combined application of a tetracycline-coated expanded polytetrafluoroethylene barrier membrane (e-PTFE, Gore-Tex s ). Methods: Twelve pairs of intra-osseous periodontal defects in 11 patients received the application of EMPs on the exposed root surface (EMP). One of the two defects received randomly, as an adjunct to EMP treatment, a tetracycline-coated e-PTFE membrane (MEMP). At baseline, 6-and 12-month probing pocket depth (PPD), clinical attachment level (CAL) and probing bone level (PBL) were measured. Results: After 12 months, the EMP defects showed a significant mean PPD reduction of 2.86 AE 0.75 mm, a mean gain in CAL of 1.28 AE 2.04 mm, a mean PBL gain of 1.63 AE 1.21 mm and a mean increase of recession (REC) of 1.56 AE 2.30 mm. The MEMP defects showed a significant mean PPD reduction of 3.02 AE 1.55 mm, a mean gain in CAL of 1.65 AE 1.29 mm, a mean PBL gain of 1.58 AE 1.92 mm and a mean increase of REC of 1.38 AE 1.63 mm. Except for significantly more post-operative discomfort at the MEMP sites, no significant differences were found between EMP and MEMP defects. Conclusion: Within the limits of this study, it is concluded that in the treatment of intra-osseous defects with EMP, the adjunctive use of a tetracycline-coated e-PTFE membrane failed to show more gain of CAL and PBL.