ライフサイエンスコーパス: furcation defect

1 llografts (DFDBA) in Class II buccal/lingual furcation defects.

2 use of bone or bone substitutes on Class II furcation defects.

3 edure, a resin-ionomer was placed into all 3 furcation defects.

4 cal or lingual, or maxillary buccal Class II furcation defects.

5 debridement alone in human mandibular molar furcation defects.

6 ditioning for the treatment of intrabony and furcation defects.

7 l antibiotics on osseous healing in Class II furcation defects.

8 tically superior osseous healing of Class II furcation defects.

9 ation of CBCT for diagnosis of intrabony and furcation defects.

10 done for both intrabony defects and Class II furcation defects.

11 n surgically created critical size Class III furcation defects.

12 al and radiographic evidence of intrabony or furcation defects.

13 on (GTR) for the correction of intrabony and furcation defects.

14 root planing (SRP) for treatment of Class II furcation defects.

15 a regenerative material in the treatment of furcation defects.

16 ve been tried and tested in the treatment of furcation defects.

17 d/or treatment planning for intrabony and/or furcation defects.

18 and/or treatment planning for intrabony and furcation defects.

19 al and mandibular facial or lingual Class II furcation defects.

20 on the topic of periodontal regeneration of furcation defects.

21 eported outcomes after surgical treatment of furcation defects.

22 iagnosis and treatment of both intrabony and furcation defects.

23 e on the outcomes of regenerative therapy in furcation defects.

24 healing of human mandibular buccal Class II furcation defects.

25 can provide a new direction in management of furcation defects.

26 patients with 10 mandibular Class II buccal furcation defects.

27 e and supports osseous regrowth in degree II furcation defects.

28 planing (SRP) for the treatment of Class II furcation defects.

29 use of BG in the treatment of intrabony and furcation defects.

30 ppropriate for the treatment of intrabony or furcation defects.

31 ne, for the treatment of mandibular class II furcation defects.

32 ound healing in surgically created Class III furcation defects.

33 ular molars to achieve Class III, subclass C furcation defects.

34 ce treatment outcomes in mandibular Class II furcation defects.

35 tly improve bone fill in mandibular Class II furcation defects.

36 emonstrated histologically in human Class II furcation defects.

37 mbrane in the healing of mandibular Class II furcation defects.

38 ported to enhance bone regeneration of molar furcation defects.

39 Of the residual furcation defects, 68% were reduced to Class I.

40 le regenerative outcomes in the treatment of furcation defects, adverse systemic and local factors sh

41 rapeutic option for the treatment of various furcation defects, among which Class II defects represen

42 guided tissue regeneration (GTR) in Class II furcation defects and establish the factors that might b

43 f CBCT for the detection of intrabony and/or furcation defects and how CBCT influenced the diagnosis

44 of regenerative therapy for the treatment of furcation defects and recommendations for future researc

45 guidelines for the therapeutic management of furcation defects and to identify priorities for future

46 d in generally favorable clinical results in furcation defects, appeared to be better than DEBR alone

47 regenerative therapy for maxillary Class III furcation defects are limited to clinical case reports.

48 ted risk factors that could lead to isolated furcation defects around molar teeth.

49 TV group in treatment of mandibular Class II furcation defects as an adjunct to SRP.

50 views some of the studies on regeneration in furcation defects as well as some of the uniqueness and

51 s and reentry documentation suggest that the furcation defect associated with poor biologic width was

52 Plaque was collected from furcation defects at baseline and 3 and 6 months post-tr

53 d mesial of the fourth premolar and Class II furcation defects at the buccal furcation of the mandibu

54 e-height loss in interproximal intrabony and furcation defects, but the length of new cementum in the

55 for the diagnosis of Class II and Class III furcation defects by clinical probing.

56 e, while diagnostic aspects of intrabony and furcation defects can be improved via the use of CBCT, l

57 he surgical treatment of mandibular Class II furcation defects compared with autologous PRF and HA bo

58 regenerative approaches for the treatment of furcation defects compared with conventional surgical th

59 ised in the area being treated, the bone and furcation defects debrided of granulomatous tissue, and

60 Following flap elevation and furcation defect debridement, an occlusal reference sten

61 tions will give more reduction in horizontal furcation defect depth compared with resorbable membrane

62 ments to evaluate regenerative procedures in furcation defects do not seem to be used as yet.

63 t, were more likely to have greater vertical furcation defect fill than the conventional OFD surgery.

64 ce of two or more mandibular facial Class II furcation defects (> or = 3 mm horizontal probing depth)

65 l, and mandibular facial or lingual Class II furcation defects has been demonstrated in several studi

66 Individuals with a single degree II furcation defect in a mandibular molar participated.

67 y subjects with a Class II buccal or lingual furcation defect in lower molars were treated.

68 Twenty-four Class II furcation defects in 24 patients were treated with eithe

69 ix proteins on the regeneration of Class III furcation defects in baboons.

70 ed using naturally occurring buccal Class II furcation defects in beagle dogs.

71 ve predictable outcomes for the treatment of furcation defects in certain clinical scenarios.

72 planing (SRP) for the treatment of Class II furcation defects in comparison with placebo gel.

73 PCs for the treatment of mandibular Class II furcation defects in humans and to provide data on the a

74 rovement following the treatment of Class II furcation defects in humans.

75 jects with Hamp's Class II buccal or lingual furcation defects in lower molars were randomly assigned

76 es (PTG) in the treatment of Class II buccal furcation defects in mandibular molars in humans.

77 llary molars; 4) facial and lingual Class II furcation defects in mandibular molars; 5) Class III fur

78 on defects in maxillary molars; 6) Class III furcation defects in mandibular molars; and 7) Class I,

79 regenerative therapy in maxillary Class III furcation defects in maxillary molars is limited to clin

80 nes in the healing of interproximal Class II furcation defects in maxillary molars using a surgical t

81 molars; 3) facial and interproximal Class II furcation defects in maxillary molars; 4) facial and lin

82 n defects in mandibular molars; 5) Class III furcation defects in maxillary molars; 6) Class III furc

83 andibular molars; and 7) Class I, II, or III furcation defects in maxillary premolars.

84 ment of surgically created buccal, degree II furcation defects in mini-pigs.

85 regenerative approaches for the treatment of furcation defects in specific clinical scenarios compare

86 regenerative approaches for the treatment of furcation defects in specific clinical scenarios compare

87 Treatment of the molar furcation defect is a challenge to the dental profession

88 Treatment of furcation defects is a core component of periodontal the

89 robing to distinguish Class II and Class III furcation defects is unknown.

90 in clinical scenarios, although most Class I furcation defects may be successfully treated with non-r

91 inical scenarios, although generally Class I furcation defects may be treated predictably with non-re

92 OFD for the treatment of mandibular Class II furcation defects may lead to slight improvements in cli

93 ent had adult periodontitis and one Class II furcation defect measuring > or = 3 mm open horizontal p

94 Twelve patients with bilateral Class II furcation defects on lower first molars participated in

95 mandibular molars, one of which had Class II furcation defects, received the hygienic phase of therap

96 bioactive glass in the treatment of Class II furcation defects regarding the clinical parameters of p

97 In Class I furcation defects, regenerative therapy may be beneficia

98 4) In Class I furcation defects, regenerative therapy may be beneficia

99 Factors influencing treatment outcomes in furcation defects remain to be studied.

100 Successful treatment of molar furcation defects remains a challenge in clinical practi

101 Treatment of molar furcation defects remains a considerable challenge in cl

102 However, its effect in regenerating furcation defects remains to be determined.

103 GTR procedure was performed in furcation defect sites using expanded polytetrafluoroeth

104 hat local delivery of 1% ALN into a Class II furcation defect stimulates a significant PD reduction,

105 Each patient contributed two furcation defects that were treated by combination thera

106 acy and outcomes of regenerative therapy for furcation defects, the use of platelet concentrates (PCs

107 ate the clinical response of buccal Class II furcation defects to open-flap debridement (OFD) and to

108 In summary, furcation defects treated with membrane barriers can be

109 mal defects and all evaluable (four of four) furcation defects treated with PDGF.

110 Furcation defects treated with rhPDGF/allograft exhibite

111 w is to evaluate whether mandibular Class II furcation defects treated with the addition of PC to OFD

112 ALN gel combination in mandibular degree II furcation defect treatment in comparison with PRF and ac

113 Furcation defect treatment with autologous PRF combined

114 orting periodontal structures and tested for furcation defect treatment.

115 In addition, the placement of DFDBA in the furcation defect under the bioabsorbable membrane result

116 and/or treatment planning for intrabony and furcation defects, using a well-known six-tiered hierarc

117 mulated recommendations for the treatment of furcation defects via regenerative therapies and the con

118 The CAL gain for furcation defects was 3.2 +/- 2.17 mm (P < 0.030).

119 nterproximal intrabony and/or molar Class II furcation defect were entered into the study.

120 Thirteen pairs of mandibular molar Class II furcation defects were evaluated in 13 patients.

121 en adult periodontal patients with Class III furcation defects were evaluated.

122 ter elevation of soft tissue flaps, Class II furcation defects were prepared by removing buccal alveo

123 two patients with mandibular buccal Class II furcation defects were randomized and categorized into t

124 A total of 69 mandibular Class II furcation defects were randomized and treated with eithe

125 ine patients with mandibular Class II buccal furcation defects were randomized to beta-tricalcium-pho

126 ety patients with mandibular buccal Class II furcation defects were randomly allocated to three treat

127 bular molars with buccal or lingual Class II furcation defects were studied.

128 Buccal degree II furcation defects were surgically created in maxillary p

129 Intrabony and furcation defects were the two most commonly discussed b

130 Seventy-two mandibular molar furcation defects were treated with either access therap

131 One hundred five mandibular furcation defects were treated with OFD + placebo gel (g

132 Treatment of furcation defects with 1.2 mg RSV in situ gel combined w

133 e regeneration (GTR) treating human Class II furcation defects with a new polylactic-acid-based bioab

134 N with PRF has potential for regeneration of furcation defects without any adverse effect on healing