Enamel matrix derivative effects on palatal mucosa wound healing: Randomized clinical trial

dc.contributor.authorMiguel, Manuela Maria Viana [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorMathias-Santamaria, Ingrid Fernandes [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorRossato, Amanda [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorFerraz, Laís Fernanda Ferreira [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorRangel, Thiago Perez
dc.contributor.authorCasarin, Renato Corrêa Viana
dc.contributor.authorTatakis, Dimitris N.
dc.contributor.authorSantamaria, Mauro Pedrine [UNESP]
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of Maryland School of Dentistry
dc.contributor.institutionPiracicaba Dental School
dc.contributor.institutionThe Ohio State University (OSU)
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of Kentucky
dc.date.accessioned2022-05-01T09:30:32Z
dc.date.available2022-05-01T09:30:32Z
dc.date.issued2021-01-01
dc.description.abstractBackground: This study was conducted to evaluate the clinical, immunologic, and patient-centered outcomes of enamel matrix protein derivative (EMD) on excisional wounds in palatal mucosa. Materials: Forty-four patients in need of ridge preservation were randomly allocated into two groups: control group (n = 22): open palatal wound after free gingival graft (FGG) harvest and EMD group (n = 22): open palatal wound after FGG harvest that received 0.3 ml of EMD. Clinical and patient-centered parameters were analyzed for 3 months post-treatment. Wound fluid levels of inflammatory markers were assessed 3 and 7 days postoperatively. Results: No significant inter-group difference was observed in remaining wound area and re-epithelialization. EMD and control groups achieved wound closure and re-epithelialization 30 days postoperatively (p <.001), without inter-group differences. Similarly, number of analgesics and Oral Health Impact Profile scores did not present significant inter-group differences (p >.05). EMD appeared to selectively modulate wound fluid levels of monocyte chemoattractant protein-1, macrophage inflammatory protein-1α, matrix metallopeptidase 9, and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-2. Conclusion: Within the limits of the present study, it can be concluded that EMD application to excisional palatal wounds using the investigated protocol does not provide clinical healing benefits, despite an apparent modulation of selected inflammatory markers.en
dc.description.affiliationSão Paulo State University (UNESP) Division of Periodontics Institute of Science and Technology
dc.description.affiliationDivision of Operative Dentistry Department of General Dentistry University of Maryland School of Dentistry
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Prosthodontics and Periodontics Division of Periodontics Piracicaba Dental School
dc.description.affiliationCollege of Dentistry Division of Periodontology The Ohio State University (OSU)
dc.description.affiliationCollege of Dentistry - Lexington University of Kentucky
dc.description.affiliationUnespSão Paulo State University (UNESP) Division of Periodontics Institute of Science and Technology
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jre.12934
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Periodontal Research.
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/jre.12934
dc.identifier.issn1600-0765
dc.identifier.issn0022-3484
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85115114586
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/233550
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Periodontal Research
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectenamel matrix proteins
dc.subjectgingival recession
dc.subjectpalate
dc.subjectpatient outcome assessment
dc.subjectwound healing
dc.titleEnamel matrix derivative effects on palatal mucosa wound healing: Randomized clinical trialen
dc.typeArtigo
unesp.author.orcid0000-0003-4828-3487[1]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0003-2518-0135[2]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0001-9354-9446[3]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0003-4486-6335[4]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0002-9248-3657[5]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0003-1743-5855[6]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0001-6327-3610[7]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0001-9468-0729[8]

Arquivos