Saving enamel with extreme bone loss by means of periodontal regeneration (PR) presents advantages equal to — or larger than — changing them with dental implants or bridges, in line with a examine that tracked sufferers for twenty years, the European Federation of Periodontology (EFP) reported.
“The concept a tooth with extreme lack of bone should all the time be eliminated isn’t essentially true,” stated Dr. Simone Cortellini of KU Leuven in Belgium, one of many lead investigators. “This examine exhibits that regeneration is a robust choice that can provide sufferers many extra years with their very own enamel.”
Associated hyperlink: Fostering Dental and Psychological Nicely-being: Holistic Dentistry
Associated hyperlink: Saving Extra Enamel with Dental Sealants
The randomized trial, introduced at EuroPerio11 in Vienna, adopted 50 sufferers with superior periodontitis. Every had at the least one tooth with attachment loss reaching or exceeding the foundation tip. Half the group acquired PR remedy to avoid wasting the tooth, whereas the opposite half had the tooth extracted and changed with a dental implant or fastened bridge.
After 20 years, each approaches proved efficient. Simply 4 enamel had been misplaced within the PR group, in comparison with two implant failures within the substitute group. Gum well being remained secure and remedy prices had been decrease within the regeneration group.
“Changing a tooth is just not essentially higher than saving it,” Cortellini stated. “If we will protect the pure tooth, we delay extraction for a few years — and that’s a win for sufferers and dental care programs.”
The examine emphasizes cautious affected person choice and follow-up, noting that regeneration isn’t appropriate for everybody.