Abstract
BACKGROUND: The traditional treatment procedures which aimed at treating periodontal disease did not result in true periodontal regeneration. Unpredictability about osseous defect fill after periodontal flap surgery has stemmed in the research of a variety of regenerative materials. This randomized clinical trial was conducted to compare regenerative potential of Biostite(®) bone graft material with and without Paroguide(®) a bioresorbable membrane in the treatment of periodontal osseous defects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty sites from a total of from ten patients were chosen for the study. Those sites were divided into experimental site A (Biostite(®)) and experimental site B (Biostite(®) with Paroguide(®)) at random. Plaque index and gingival index (GI) were the clinical parameters noted at baseline, 3(rd), 6(th) and 9(th) months, whereas the probing pocket depth, clinical attachment level and gingival recession were noted at baseline, 6(th) and 9(th) months. Radiographic evaluation was made by using computer-assisted densitometric analysis. Intrasurgical measurements were done at baseline and 9 months. Statistical analysis was done using paired t-test and un-paired t-test. RESULTS: Both experimental site A and B showed a significant reduction in plaque and GI. All clinical parameters as well as radiographic image analysis showed highly significant improvement from baseline to 9 months for both sites. Inter-group comparison does not show statistically significant improvement. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggested that both Biostite(®) bone graft and Paroguide(®) membrane have promised encouraging results in the management of periodontal intrabony defects, however, the groups did differed to each other statistically.