Enamel matrix derivative <i>versus</i> guided tissue regeneration in the presence of nicotine: a histomorphometric study in dogs

Pimentel, Suzana Peres; Sallum, Antônio Wilson; Saldanha, Juliana Bezerra; Casati, Márcio Zaffalon; Nociti, Francisco Humberto; Sallum, Enílson Antônio

doi:10.1111/j.1600-051x.2006.00989.x

Cited by 14 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A recent retrospective study, evaluating two‐ or three‐wall intrabony defects treated with enamel matrix derivative, showed that failure to achieve ≥65% of defect resolution was six‐fold higher in smokers than in nonsmokers . A previous study of our research group, in dogs, demonstrated that, in the presence of nicotine administration, treatment of dehiscence‐type defects with enamel matrix derivative promoted more new‐cementum formation compared with open‐flap debridement and guided tissue regeneration with resorbable membrane . Although regenerative procedures are generally less predictable in smokers than in nonsmokers, this finding suggests that enamel matrix derivative may be more predictable for periodontal regeneration in smokers than the use of membranes.…”

Section: Response Of Smokers To Periodontal Treatmentsmentioning

confidence: 84%

Current perspective of the impact of smoking on the progression and treatment of periodontitis

Nociti¹,

Casati²,

Duarte³

2014

Periodontology 2000

Self Cite

213

222

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This literature review provides an overview of the current scenario regarding the impact of smoking on the progression and treatment of periodontitis; clinical, microbiological and immunological data from studies from our and other groups are presented. In general, preclinical and clinical data are unanimous in demonstrating that smokers present increased susceptibility, greater severity and faster progression of periodontal disease compared with nonsmokers. The evidence further demonstrates that smokers lose more teeth and have a less favorable response to therapy than do nonsmokers. Although it is well established that smoking significantly impacts on the onset, progression and outcome of periodontal disease, the mechanisms involved remain unclear. More importantly, some of the reported deleterious effects of smoking on periodontal tissues have been reported to be reversible upon participation in smoking-cessation programs. Therefore, clinicians should strongly advise smokers to enroll in cessation strategies, even temporarily, in order to improve the overall outcome.

show abstract

Section: Response Of Smokers To Periodontal Treatmentsmentioning

confidence: 84%

Current perspective of the impact of smoking on the progression and treatment of periodontitis

Nociti¹,

Casati²,

Duarte³

2014

Periodontology 2000

Self Cite

213

222

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The animals received subcutaneous administration of nicotine (2 mg/kg twice a day with a 12‐hour interval between the applications). The results demonstrated a greater length of new cementum in the EMD‐treated sites compared to open flap debridement in the presence of nicotine 20 . Very limited information is available from in vivo studies on whether cigarette smoke inhalation (CSI) would affect the healing capacity of periodontal tissues (periodontal ligament, bone, and cementum) with EMD treatment.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Cigarette Smoke Inhalation on the Outcome of Enamel Matrix Derivative Treatment in Rats: Histometric Analysis

Corrêa

Campos

Benatti

et al. 2010

Journal of Periodontology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These studies are significant in the light of the wide use of enamel matrix proteins in several periodontal and peri‐implant applications and have shown that new alveolar bone, as well as new cementum formation, can be facilitated through their use whilst preventing the apical migration of the epithelium . An interesting study also demonstrated that while nicotine impaired membrane‐induced regeneration, the efficacy of enamel matrix proteins was not affected . Another valuable contribution was the observation that regenerative techniques using enamel matrix derivatives not only resulted in enhanced hard‐tissue formation, but also increased gingival tissue thickness .…”

Section: Dog Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Enamel matrix proteins have been tested in periodontal regeneration in dogs, and the efficacy of such preparations in this respect has been demonstrated . These studies are significant in the light of the wide use of enamel matrix proteins in several periodontal and peri‐implant applications and have shown that new alveolar bone, as well as new cementum formation, can be facilitated through their use whilst preventing the apical migration of the epithelium .…”

Section: Dog Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Animal models for periodontal regeneration and peri‐implant responses

Kantarcı¹,

Hastürk²,

Dyke³

2015

Periodontology 2000

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Translation of experimental data to the clinical setting requires the safety and efficacy of such data to be confirmed in animal systems before application in humans. In dental research, the animal species used is dependent largely on the research question or on the disease model. Periodontal disease and, by analogy, peri‐implant disease, are complex infections that result in a tissue‐degrading inflammatory response. It is impossible to explore the complex pathogenesis of periodontitis or peri‐implantitis using only reductionist in‐vitro methods. Both the disease process and healing of the periodontal and peri‐implant tissues can be studied in animals. Regeneration (after periodontal surgery), in response to various biologic materials with potential for tissue engineering, is a continuous process involving various types of tissue, including epithelia, connective tissues and alveolar bone. The same principles apply to peri‐implant healing. Given the complexity of the biology, animal models are necessary and serve as the standard for successful translation of regenerative materials and dental implants to the clinical setting. Smaller species of animal are more convenient for disease‐associated research, whereas larger animals are more appropriate for studies that target tissue healing as the anatomy of larger animals more closely resembles human dento‐alveolar architecture. This review focuses on the animal models available for the study of regeneration in periodontal research and implantology; the advantages and disadvantages of each animal model; the interpretation of data acquired; and future perspectives of animal research, with a discussion of possible nonanimal alternatives. Power calculations in such studies are crucial in order to use a sample size that is large enough to generate statistically useful data, whilst, at the same time, small enough to prevent the unnecessary use of animals.

show abstract

Enamel matrix derivative versus guided tissue regeneration in the presence of nicotine: a histomorphometric study in dogs

Abstract: In the presence of nicotine, EMD may promote more new cementum formation than OFD while GTR failed to provide a significant difference.

Cited by 14 publications

References 62 publications

Current perspective of the impact of smoking on the progression and treatment of periodontitis

Current perspective of the impact of smoking on the progression and treatment of periodontitis

The Impact of Cigarette Smoke Inhalation on the Outcome of Enamel Matrix Derivative Treatment in Rats: Histometric Analysis

Animal models for periodontal regeneration and peri‐implant responses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About