Clinical evaluation of wound healing following multiple exposures to enamel matrix protein derivative in the treatment of intrabony periodontal defects.

Abstract

Multiple exposures to enamel matrix protein derivative (EMD) during periodontal therapy have been shown to be safe for the patient. The purpose of this study was to clinically determine if an altered course of wound healing would occur after multiple exposures to EMD in the treatment of intrabony defects. A secondary aim was to assess the efficacy of EMD in probing depth reduction and clinical attachment level gain. Thirty-two systemically healthy patients (18 females, 14 males, 33 to 69 years old) who were being treated for moderate to advanced periodontal disease were selected for the study. Surgical procedures involving 2 sites were separated by at least 8 weeks, and wound healing comparisons were made between the first and second procedure. Patients were given a diary card the day of surgery, which consisted of questions concerning the presence and severity of headaches, root hypersensitivity, tooth pain, swelling, and itching. Patients were also examined at postoperative visits to clinically assess wound healing and discuss responses to the questionnaire. Soft tissue measurements were taken the day of surgery and 6 months postoperatively to ascertain probing depth reduction (PD) and gains in clinical attachment levels (CAL). The results revealed no clinically detectable reaction that could not be attributed to normal postoperative sequelae. There were no differences in reported symptoms between patient gender, first and second procedures, or intrabony and non-intrabony defects. Smokers were found to have a statistically significantly higher incidence of severe symptoms in root hypersensitivity, tooth pain, and swelling compared to non-smokers (n = 21). The mean probing depth reduction was 3.8 +/- 1.5 mm (2 to 9 mm), while the mean clinical attachment level gain was 2.8 +/- 1.7 mm (0 to 8 mm). The findings of this study demonstrate that EMD is a clinically safe product to use in the treatment of periodontal defects and that multiple uses do not have a negative impact on periodontal wound healing. In addition, a statistically significant gain in clinical attachment and reduction in probing depth were demonstrated.