OBJECTIVE: A combination of peripheral blood mesenchymal stem cells (PBMSCs) and platelet rich fibrin matrix (PRFM) could be a probable periodontal regenerative material with the synergy of the added benefits of each material. This randomized controlled clinical trial aimed to evaluate the regenerative capacity of supercell (PRFM and PBMSCs) compared with that of PRFM alone in human periodontal mandibular intraosseous defects (IOD).
METHODS: This study included 17 patients of both sexes (12 men, 5 women) aged 30-55 years (mean age = 37.7±4.4 years) who fulfilled the inclusion criteria (radiographic and clinical evaluation for bilateral IOD with probing pocket depth (PPD ≥ 6 mm). A split-mouth design was used in each patient. A total of 34 sites in the mandibular arch randomly received PRFM alone + open flap debridement (OFD) [Control sites] or supercell (PRFM+PBMSCs) + OFD [Test sites]. The clinical parameters plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), PPD, clinical attachment level (CAL), and in the radiographic parameters; defect depth (DD) and defect fill percentage (DFP) were recorded at baseline, 3 and 6 months postoperatively. Early wound healing index (EHI) was used at 1 week to assess wound healing ability.
RESULTS: At 6 months, radiographic parameters revealed significant reduction in DD (P<0.001) and significant DFP values in the test group compared with the control group. The supercell showed significant improvement in PPD and CAL at the end of 6 months (P<0.001). EHI scores at 1 week showed no statistically significant difference between the test and control groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Supercell can be considered a regenerative material in the treatment of periodontal IODs.

The masticatory organ is at the center of dental practice. Tooth loss, regarded as an organ failure, is a core dispute in our profession, as it more often than not does not happen spon-taneously but is influenced by the dentist\'s treatment plan. Despite the prosthetic possibili-ties of tooth replacement, efforts should be made to preserve as many teeth as possible. Decisions between tooth preservation and extraction are complex and have far-reaching consequences. This article discusses this problem using a clinical case study of a 43-year-old female patient with pronounced localized periodontitis. After a comprehensive diagnosis and treatment planning, a daring regenerative therapy was carried out to try to preserve the tooth. The case shows that even seemingly hopeless teeth can be successfully treated syn-chronously using modern therapeutic approaches. Initial literature data supports the possi-bility of preserving severely compromised teeth in the long term in compliant patients. An integrative treatment approach based on individual patient factors and modern regenerative techniques may well be a viable alternative to tooth extraction and prosthetic restoration, albeit not inexpensive and uncomplicated. This communication emphasizes the need for precise diagnostics, a comprehensive treatment plan, and honest communication with pa-tients about the prospects of success and possible risks, and highlights the strengths of con-sistent tooth preservation.
Das Kauorgan steht im Mittelpunkt der zahnärztlichen Praxis. Zahnverlust wird als Organver-sagen betrachtet und stellt ein bedeutendes Problem dar. Trotz prothetischer Möglichkeiten sollte der Erhalt möglichst vieler Zähne angestrebt werden. Entscheidungen zwischen Zahn-erhalt und Extraktion sind komplex und haben weitreichende Folgen. Dieser Artikel behan-delt das Thema anhand eines klinischen Falls einer 43-jährigen Patientin mit ausgeprägter lokalisierter Parodontitis. Nach umfassender Diagnose und Behandlungsplanung wurde eine regenerative Therapie durchgeführt, um den Zahn zu erhalten. Der Fall zeigt, dass auch scheinbar hoffnungslose Zähne mit modernen Therapiemethoden bei zu guter Mundhygiene motivierbaren Patienten erfolgreich behandelt werden können. Erste Literaturdaten unter-stützen die Möglichkeit, stark beeinträchtigte Zähne langfristig zu erhalten. Ein integrativer Behandlungsansatz, basierend auf individuellen Patientenfaktoren und modernen Regenera-tionstechniken, kann eine Alternative zur Extraktion und prothetischen Versorgung sein, ob-wohl er kostspielig und kompliziert ist. Dieser Artikel betont die Notwendigkeit präziser Di-agnostik, umfassender Behandlungspläne und ehrlicher Kommunikation mit den Patienten über Erfolgsaussichten und Risiken sowie die Stärken des konsequenten Zahnerhalts.

Periodontitis is a serious form of oral gum inflammation with recession of gingival soft tissue, destruction of the periodontal ligament, and absorption of alveolar bone. Management of periodontal tissue and bone destruction, along with the restoration of functionality and structural integrity, is not possible with conventional clinical therapy alone. Guided bone and tissue regeneration therapy employs an occlusive biodegradable barrier membrane and graft biomaterials to guide the formation of alveolar bone and tissues for periodontal restoration and regeneration. Amongst several grafting approaches, alloplastic grafts/biomaterials, either derived from natural sources, synthesization, or a combination of both, offer a wide variety of resources tailored to multiple needs. Examining several pertinent scientific databases (Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library) provided the foundation to cover the literature on synthetic graft materials and membranes, devoted to achieving periodontal tissue and bone regeneration. This discussion proceeds by highlighting potential grafting and barrier biomaterials, their characteristics, efficiency, regenerative ability, therapy outcomes, and advancements in periodontal guided regeneration therapy. Marketed and standardized quality products made of grafts and membrane biomaterials have been documented in this work. Conclusively, this paper illustrates the challenges, risk factors, and combination of biomaterials and drug delivery systems with which to reconstruct the hierarchical periodontium.

BACKGROUND: The distal aspect of the second molar (d-M2) often exhibits infrabony defects due to the adjacent third molar. Although the defects can be treated by guided tissue regeneration (GTR) after removing the third molar, the optimal timing remains uncertain following third molar removal in clinical decision-making. This study aimed to compare delayed and immediate GTR treatments to assist in clinical decision-making.
METHODS: D-M2 infrabony defects with a minimum 1-year follow-up were collected and divided into three groups: Immediate GTR group, which underwent third molar extraction and received GTR simultaneously; Delayed GTR group, which underwent delayed GTR at least 3 months after third molar extraction; and Control group, which underwent only scaling and root planing during third molar extraction. The clinical and radiographic parameters related to the infrabony defect before GTR and post-surgery were evaluated using the Kruskal-Wallis test or one-way ANOVA, followed by post-hoc Dunn\'s test or the Bonferroni test for pairwise comparisons.
RESULTS: A total of 109 d-M2 infrabony defects were assessed. No significant differences were found between the two GTR groups, although both of them showed significant reductions in infrabony defect depth: the immediate GTR group (2.77 ± 1.97 mm vs. 0.68 ± 1.03 mm, p < 0.001) and the delayed GTR group (2.98 ± 1.08 mm vs. 0.68 ± 1.03 mm, p < 0.001) compared to the control group.
CONCLUSIONS: GTR can effectively improve d-M2 infrabony defects when the third molar is removed, whether simultaneously or delayed. Patients may experience less discomfort with immediate GTR treatment as it requires only one surgery.

With increased awareness, both in the dental literature and by the general public, of peri-implant disease, a growing trend in dentistry is to save teeth with a \"questionable\" periodontal prognosis. This prospective study involving such patients was designed to evaluate the effects of combining a bioactive barrier and graft, not on the socket but to augment adjacent periodontal conditions on teeth with severe periodontal bone loss at the time of extraction of an adjacent tooth. Fifteen patients were selected; teeth were extracted, ground, prepared with a pH 11 cleanser, partially demineralized, and made into a graft. This mixture was used to augment socket volume and perform periodontal regenerative surgery. The graft was covered with a bioactive amnion-chorion barrier membrane. Bioactive membranes can stimulate host cells in the surrounding gingival and periosteal tissues to accelerate site closure and healing, simultaneously exerting positive effects on the underlying bone and graft material not observed to the same extent with other membranes. This can improve healing and site regeneration as shown clinically and radiographically in this report. Use of these bioactive barrier membrane and dentin graft materials may have additive effects and provide stimulus for conversion to host bone after site healing. The combination of an amnion-chorion membrane with autologous dentin graft appears to maximize the benefits of the individual materials, improving guided tissue regeneration results and the prognoses of periodontally involved teeth.

The treatment of edentulism with dental implants is often combined with hard- and soft-tissue grafting procedures as a means to improve marginal bone stability and esthetic outcomes. One such method of hard-tissue grafting involves the utilization of a titanium membrane as a space maintenance device to contain the graft material and support the soft tissue. These membranes, however, are typically limited in their ability to be customized and, therefore, are often unsuitable for varying clinical situations. This case report presents a simplified prototype design of an abutment-associated titanium membrane. This design enables a greater level of customization and demonstrates stable clinical and radiographic results after 2 years of follow-up.

Commercial mammalian collagen-based membranes used for guided tissue regeneration (GTR) in periodontal defect repair still face significant challenges, including ethical concerns, cost-effectiveness, and limited capacity for periodontal bone regeneration. Herein, an enhanced biomimetic mineralized hydroxyapatite (HAp)-fish-scale collagen (FCOL)/chitosan (CS) nanofibrous membrane was developed. Specifically, eco-friendly and biocompatible collagen extracted from grass carp fish scales was co-electrospun with CS to produce a biomimetic extracellular matrix membrane. An enhanced biomimetic mineralized HAp coating provided abundant active calcium and phosphate sites, which promoted cell osteogenic differentiation, and showed greater in vivo absorption. In vitro experiments demonstrated that the HAp-FCOL/CS membranes exhibited desirable properties with no cytotoxicity, provided a mimetic microenvironment for stem cell recruitment, and induced periodontal ligament cell osteogenic differentiation. In rat periodontal defects, HAp-FCOL/CS membranes significantly promoted new periodontal bone formation and regeneration. The results of this study indicate that low-cost, eco-friendly, and biomimetic HAp-FCOL/CS membranes could be promising alternatives to GTR membranes for periodontal regeneration in the clinic.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the regenerative clinical and radiographic effects of cross-linked hyaluronic acid (xHyA) with enamel matrix proteins (EMD) at six months after regenerative treatment of periodontal intrabony defects.
METHODS: Sixty patients presenting one intrabony defect each were randomly assigned into control (EMD) and test (xHyA) groups. Clinical attachment level (CAL) gain was the primary outcome, while pocket probing depth (PPD), gingival recession (REC), bleeding on probing (BOP), full-mouth plaque score (FMPS), full-mouth bleeding score (FMBS), and radiographic parameters such as defect depth (BC-BD), and defect width (DW) were considered secondary outcome variables. Parameters were recorded at baseline and after 6 months.
RESULTS: At the 6-month follow-up, 54 patients were available for statistical analysis. In the control and test groups, the mean CAL gain was statistically significant in the intragroup comparison (p < 0.001). 48.1% of test sites showed a CAL gain ≤ 2 mm compared with 33.3% of control sites. The mean PPD reduction was statistically significant in the intragroup comparison in both groups (p < 0.001). The mean REC increase was similar in the two groups: 1.04 ± 1.29 mm vs 1.11 ± 1.22 mm (test vs control). The mean BC-BD, DW, FMPS, FMBS, and BOP changed statistically significantly only in the intragroup comparison, not in the intergroup comparison.
CONCLUSIONS: Both treatments, EMD and xHyA, produced similar statistically significant clinical and radiographical improvements after six months when compared with baseline.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of flapless procedure alone or in combination with enamel matrix derivatives (EMD) in the treatment of deep intrabony defects.
METHODS: Forty-six patients re-evaluated after non-surgical therapy were randomly assigned to the test (flapless with EMD) or control group (flapless alone). Clinical measurements were recorded pre-surgery and at 6 and 12 months after surgery, and radiographic measurements were taken pre-surgery and after 12 months.
RESULTS: Forty-six patients completed the study. Improvements were observed in both groups at 12 months for mean clinical attachment level (CAL) gain, with significant differences between test (3.9 ± 1.1 mm) and control groups (3.0 ± 1.2) (p = .017). Probing pocket depth (PPD) reduction (4.0 ± 0.7 vs. 3.3 ± 1.4 mm) was also near to statistical significance (p = .051). Also, more sites achieved successful composite outcome measure (final PPD ≤ 4 mm and CAL gain ≥3 mm) for the regenerative treatment in the flapless + EMD group (82.6% vs. 52.2%; p = .028). In terms of radiographic outcomes, EMD yielded a greater defect bone fill than flapless treatment alone (3.0 ± 1.0 mm vs. 1.8 ± 1.5 mm; p < .001).
CONCLUSIONS: The additional application of EMD during the flapless procedure for intrabony defects slightly improved clinical and radiographic outcomes.
RESULTS: gov identification number: NCT05456555.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess membrane use with a bone substitute graft for guided bone regeneration (GBR) in experimental dehiscence defects.
METHODS: Maxillary second incisors (I2) in 9 dogs were extracted. Six weeks later, implants were inserted and experimental dehiscence defects (5 × 3 mm) created on the buccal aspect. The defects and surrounding bone were grafted with deproteinized bovine bone mineral. One side (test) was covered with a resorbable collagen membrane whereas the contralateral side (control) was not. After 6 weeks, histomorphometrical analysis was performed to evaluate: (a) first bone-to-implant contact (fBIC), (b) buccal bone thickness at 1 mm increments from implant shoulder, (c) regenerated area (RA), (d) area and percentages of new bone (B), bone substitute (BS) and mineralized tissue (MT).
RESULTS: The histological appearance was similar between test and control sites. At central and lateral sections, there were no differences between groups for fBIC, buccal bone thickness, RA, BS, B, %B, MT and %MT. At central sections, membrane use favoured more %BS and %MT (p = 0.052). There was significantly more B, %B and MT at lateral compared to central sections.
CONCLUSIONS: Membrane use tended to retain more bone substitute, but had no effect on new bone ingrowth. Lateral sections showed significantly more bone ingrowth and mineralized tissue compared to central sections, confirming that new bone ingrowth takes place mainly from the lateral walls of the defect.
CONCLUSIONS: Preclinical research to clarify the dynamics of bone regeneration in GBR procedures is relevant in clinical practice.