A comparative study of the clinical effects of PRP and non-absorbable membrane in the treatment of mandibular class II furcations

Kim, Chang Ho; Lim, Sung Bin; Chung, Chin Hyung; Hong, Ki Seok

Abstract

This study was performed to compare the clinical effectiveness of two regenerative techniques for class II furcation involvements in human: a combination of bone grafts with PRP vs. GTR with bone grafts. The e-PTFE group was treated with non-absorbable membrane and bone grafts, the PRP group was treated with PRP and bone grafts Pocket depth, clinical attachment level, and gingival recession were measured at baseline and postoperative 6 months. Vertical and horizontal furcation depth were measured by re-entry surgeries at 6 months post-treatment Both groups were statistically analyzed by Wilcoxon signed Ranks Test & Mann-whitney Test using SPSS program (5% significance level). The results were as follows: 1. The change of pocket depth, clinical attachment level, vertical furcation depth and horizontal furcation depth in both groups was decreased significantly at 6 months than at baseline. (p<0.05) 2. The change of gingival recession in both groups was increased significantly at 6 months than at baseline. (p<0.05) 3. The change of alveolar crest absorption in both groups was increased at 6 months than at baseline but there were no statistically significant differences. 4. The change of pocket depth, clinical attachment level, vertical furcation depth and horizontal furcation depth in both groups was increased significantly at 6 months, but there were no statistically or clinically significant differences with both groups. 5. The change of gingival recession and alveolar crest absorption in both groups was increased at 6 months, but there were no statistically or clinically significant differences with both groups. In conclusion, the use of bone graft with PRP or GTR technique improved clinical index of the soft and hard tissue in mandibular class II furcation involvement but there were no statistically or clinically significant differences between bone graft with PRP and GTR technique.