Evaluation of Nano- Hydroxyapatite versus Hydroxyapatite Crystals in the Treatment of Periodontal Intrabony Defects | ||||
| Al-Azhar Dental Journal for Girls | ||||
| Article 6, Volume 3, Issue 3, July 2016, Page 201-208 PDF (450.58 K) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/adjg.2016.5088 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
| Amal EL Said1; Eatemad Shoriebah2; Naglaa EL Kilany3 | ||||
| 1Demonstrator in Department of Oral Medicine, Periodontology,Oral Diagnosis and Dental Radiology Faculty of Dental Medicine Al-Azhar University, (Girls Branch) | ||||
| 2Professor of Oral Medicine, periodontology, Oral Diagnosis and Dental Radiology Department, Faculty of Dental Medicine Al-Azhar University, (Girls Branch) | ||||
| 3Assistant Professor of Oral Medicine, Periodontology, Oral Diagnosis and Dental Radiology Department,Faculty of Dental Medicine Al- Azhar University, (Girls Branch) | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| The aim of the present study was to evaluate clinically and radiographically the effectiveness of nano-crystalline hydroxyapatite (NcHA) versus hydroxyapatite (HA) crystals in the treatment of intrabony periodontal defects. Subjects and Methods: Twelve patients with bilateral defects, with probing depth (PD) ≥5 mm and clinical attachment loss (CAL) ≥3 mm participated in the present study. Subjects were divided randomly into Group 1: 12 sites treated surgically with open flap debridement (OFD) and placement of NcHA (1) as a bone substitute. Group 2: 12 sites treated surgically with open flap debridement and placement of HA (2) as a bone substitute. The following clinical parameters were recorded: PD, CAL, plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), alveolar bone level percentage and bone density percentage. Results: At 6 months following therapy, PD and CAL decreased by time, with a statistically significant difference in both groups .On comparison of the mean difference in PD and CAL between the two groups after Mann-Whitney U test was applied at baseline, 3 and 6 months, scores were found to be statistically non-significant (p>0.01). A significant reduction in PI and GI were recorded following therapy. As regard to radiographic bone measurements, in both groups, alveolar bone level percent decreased by time, with a non-significant difference. The change occurring in the first interval was greater in both groups, with a non-significant difference. In both groups, bone density percent increased by time, with a significant difference. The change occurring in the second interval was greater in both groups, with a non-significant difference between changes occurring in both intervals. Conclusion: Both NcHA and conventional HA led to the improvement of clinical and radiographic parameters over the course of the study. The NcHA group did not show any significant improvement over the HA group. | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 165 PDF Download: 360 |
||||
