This review article aims to: (1) provide the biological background necessary to understand the rational for the use of EMD for periodontal regeneration, (2) present animal and human histological evidence of periodontal regeneration following EMD application, (3) provide clinically relevant indications for the use of EMD and (4) discuss future avenues of research including key early findings leading to the development of Osteogain, a new carrier system for EMD specifically developed with better protein adsorption to bone grafting materials.

Objectives This study aims to compare the treatment outcomes of periodontal intrabony defects by using platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) with other commonly utilized modalities. Materials and methods The eligibility criteria comprised randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the clinical outcomes of PRF with that of other modalities. Studies were classified into 10 categories as follows: (1) open flap debridement (OFD) alone versus OFD/PRF; (2) OFD/bone graft (OFD/BG) versus OFD/PRF; (3) OFD/BG versus OFD/BG/PRF; (4–6) OFD/barrier membrane (BM), OFD/PRP, or OFD/enamel matrix derivative (EMD) versus OFD/PRF; (7) OFD/EMD versus OFD/EMD/PRF; (8–10) OFD/PRF versus OFD/PRF/metformin, OFD/PRF/bisphosphonates, or OFD/PRF/statins. Weighted means and forest plots were calculated for probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), and radiographic bone fill (RBF). Results From 551 articles identified, 27 RCTs were included. The use of OFD/PRF statistically significantly reduced PD and improved CAL and RBF when compared to OFD. No clinically significant differences were reported when OFD/BG was compared to OFD/PRF. The addition of PRF to OFD/BG led to significant improvements in CAL and RBF. No differences were reported between any of the following groups (OFD/BM, OFD/PRP, and OFD/EMD) when compared to OFD/PRF. No improvements were also reported when PRF was added to OFD/EMD. The addition of all three of the following biomolecules (metformin, bisphosphonates, and statins) to OFD/PRF led to statistically significant improvements of PD, CAL, and RBF. Conclusions The use of PRF significantly improved clinical outcomes in intrabony defects when compared to OFD alone with similar levels being observed between OFD/BG and OFD/PRF. Future research geared toward better understanding potential ways to enhance the regenerative properties of PRF with various small biomolecules may prove valuable for future clinical applications. Future research investigating PRF at histological level is also needed. Clinical relevance The use of PRF in conjunction with OFD statistically significantly improved PD, CAL, and RBF values, yielding to comparable outcomes to OFD/BG. The combination of PRF with bone grafts or small biomolecules may offer certain clinical advantages, thus warranting further investigations.

Novel BCP scaffolds are able to induce ectopic bone formation without the use of osteoinductive growth factors such as BMP2 and thus demonstrate a large clinical possibility to further enhance bone formation for a variety of clinical procedures.

Although there were no statistically significant differences between the 2 treatment groups, histological observation indicated that CPC seemed to act as a scaffold for bone formation and provided histocompatible healing of periodontal tissues in this study. This cement might be applicable to periodontal therapy; however, further investigations are required.

Objectives The aim of this randomized controlled clinical trial was to compare the clinical outcomes obtained in intrabony defects following regenerative periodontal surgery using the single-flap approach (SFA) in conjunction with either hyaluronic acid (HA) or enamel matrix derivative (EMD). Materials and methods Thirty-two intrabony defects in 32 healthy subjects were randomly assigned: HA (test group) or EMD (control group). Clinical attachment level (CAL), probing depth (PD), gingival recession (REC), and bleeding on probing (BOP) were recorded at baseline,12, 18, and 24 months after surgery. Results At 24 months, both treatments resulted in statistically significant clinical improvements evidenced by PD-reduction and CAL-gain (p<0.001). The mean CAL-gain was 2.19±1.11 mm in the test and 2.94±1.12 mm in the control sites (p=0.067). PD-reduction was statistically significantly higher for the control group (4.5±0.97 mm) than the test group (3.31±0.70 mm), (p=0.001). CAL-gain ≤ 3 mm was observed in 87.5% and in 62.5% of the test and control sites, respectively. Test sites showed slightly lower REC values than the control sites. No statistically significant differences were found for BOP between treatments. Conclusions The present findings indicate that both treatments led to statistically significant clinical improvements compared to baseline, although the application of EMD resulted in statistically significantly higher PD-reduction compared to the use of HA. Clinical relevance The use of HA in conjunction with a SFA resulted in significant PD-reduction and CAL-gain, pointing to the potential clinical relevance of this material in regenerative periodontal surgery.

The candidate bFGF treatment supported periodontal regeneration comparable with that of established benchmarks: EMD and PDGF/beta-TCP.

The present results suggest that the combination of EMD and PADM in conjunction with CAF may represent a promising approach for treating single Miller class II gingival recessions.

The use of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) membranes has been shown to additionally improve the clinical outcomes of root coverage in Miller Class I and II gingival recessions compared to the use of coronally advanced flap (CAF) alone. No change in keratinized mucosa width (KMW) or reduction in pocket depths was reported. Compared to the CAF+connective tissue graft (CTG) group, a statistically significant increase in root coverage (RC) and KWM was observed in the CAF+CTG group. No differences between PRF and EMD or between PRF and AM were noted for all investigated parameters. In conclusion, the data indicate that PRF improves RC and clinical attachment level (CAL) compared to CAF alone; however, PRF did not improve KWT. It may therefore be recommended that in cases with deficiencies in baseline KWT, CAF+CTG may preferentially lead to better clinical outcomes.