Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 86038

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2022 | Month : June | Volume : 16 | Issue : 6 | Page : ZC38 - ZC44 Full Version

Efficacy of Nanocrystalline Calcium Sulphate Bone Graft (Nanogen®) and Platelet Rich Fibrin in the Treatment of Periodontal Intrabony Defects: A Split Mouth Randomised Clinical Study


Published: June 1, 2022 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2022/52921.16498
Freeda Ampotti, Suchetha Aghanashini, N Sapna, BM Darshan, SM Apoorva, Divya Bhat, Reshmi V Nair

1. Postgraduate, Department of Periodontics, D.A.P.M. RV Dental College, Bangalore, Karnataka, India. 2. Professor and Head, Department of Periodontics, D.A.P.M. RV Dental College, Bangalore, Karnataka, India. 3. Reader, Department of Periodontics, D.A.P.M. RV Dental College, Bangalore, Karnatka, India. 4. Reader, Department of Periodontics, D.A.P.M. RV Dental College, Bangalore, Karnatka, India. 5. Reader, Department of Periodontics, D.A.P.M. RV Dental College, Bangalore, Karnatka, India. 6. Senior Lecturer, Department of Periodontics, D.A.P.M. RV Dental College, Bangalore, Karnatka, India. 7. Postgraduate, Department of Periodontics, D.A.P.M. RV Dental College, Bangalore, Karnataka, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr Freeda Ampotti,
DA Pandu Memorial RV Dental College, No. CA 37, 24th Main, JP Nagar 1st Phase, Bangalore-560078, Karnataka, India.
E-mail: freeda.ampotti@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Periodontal disease leads to the loss of supporting structures of the tooth. Recent years have witnessed the evolution of many regenerating materials that have shown to be effective in regenerating the loss structures.

Aim: To evaluate and compare clinically and radiographically the efficacy of Platelet Rich Fibrin (PRF) and Nanocrystalline Calcium Sulphate Bone Graft (NanoGen®) in the treatment of intrabony defects.

Materials and Methods: A split mouth randomised clinical study was done in the Department of Periodontology D.A.P.M.R.V. Dental College Bangalore from November 2018 to May 2020. In this study, 30 surgical sites were selected from 15 chronic periodontitis patients American Academy of Periodontology (AAP, 1999) of age between 35-65 years and with interproximal probing depth ≥5 mm following phase I therapy and radiographic evidence of intrabony defects ≥3 mm deep. They were divided into two groups: Group I (n=15) received open flap debridement with Nanocrystalline Calcium Sulphate (nCS) and Group II (n=15) open flap debridement with PRF. Clinical parameters assessed were Gingival Index (GI), Plaque Index (PI), Gingival Recession (GR), Probing Pocket Depth (PPD) and Clinical Attachment Level (CAL). Intragroup was compared using Repeated Measures of ANOVA followed by Bonferroni's Post hoc Test and intergroup was compared using Independent Student Test.

Results: Total 15 patients were selected in each group of which 10 were male and 5 were female patients. Mean age of the patients was 39.3 years. There was significant reduction in GI (p-value=0.04,PPD (p-value=0.04) and gain in CAL (p-value=0.04) in group I. The mean difference in CAL was also statistically significant in group II (p-value=0.01).The mean difference PI was not statistically significant between baseline and three months and baseline and six months in both groups. GR increased from baseline to three months and remained same at six months (p-value for group I and group II=0.36) in both groups. On intergroup comparison, group I (nCS) showed better improvement in clinical parameters like PPD (p-value=0.01), CAL (p-value=0.01) and BF (p-value=0.002) at all time intervals compared to group II (PRF).

Conclusion: There was improvement in all clinical parameters except GR in both groups. So both can be used as regenerative materials. But based on this study nanocrystalline calcium sulphate bone graft can be preferred over PRF as a regenerative material.

Keywords

Bone fill, Bone grafting, Periodontal disease, Regeneration

Periodontal diseases include a wide range of inflammatory conditions that affect the tooth supporting tissues and can lead to loss of tooth and contribute to systemic inflammation (1). The characteristics features of periodontal disease include gingival inflammation, periodontal pocket formation, and loss of connective tissue attachment and alveolar bone around the affected teeth (2). Once the inflammatory aspect of the disease has been controlled, then the periodontal therapy is aimed at the regeneration of the destroyed tissues (3).

At present different types of bone grafts are used. According to their origin they have been classified as: autografts (obtained from the same patient), allograft (the same species but a different individual), xenograft (different species) and alloplast (synthetic graft). Depending on their action on bone, they were attributed with osteogenic, osteoinductive or osteoconductive capabilities (4).

Calcium sulphate has been used in the field of dentistry for more than 30 years. The use of plaster of Paris to fill bone defects in dentistry was introduced by Bahn (5). Calcium sulfate is gaining attention because of its biocompatibility and handling characteristics, porosity and different rates of dissolution, chemical and physical similarity to bone minerals. They act as resorbable osteoconductive scaffolds that provide osteogenesis and prevent tissue invasion, thus act as space filler (6).

Degradation of calcium sulphate can be explained by two mechanisms. Initially there is release of sulphur and calcium ions in the biological environment that results in the formation of carbonate and stimulation of calcium ion in cellular activity. The second mechanism involves precipitation of calcium phosphate, that will lead to a transient fall in pH. This results in demineralization of existing bone leading to exposure of bioactive molecules. This leads to release of growth factors like bone morphogenetic proteins and transforming growth factor, which stimulates the growth of bone (7).

Recently nanocrystalline forms of bone graft with smaller particle size is gaining attention, which have advantages of sustain release, and slower rate of resorption as compared to normal size particles (8). NanoGen® is a recent product which contain nanocrystalline calcium sulphate with particle size of 200 to 900 nanometers. When mixed with saline, putty consistency is obtained, making the material easy to handle and moldable. After placement, it undergoes controlled degradation within three to four months. This in turn leads to the deposition of calcium phosphate that stimulates the formation of bone (8).

Regenerative potential of the platelet was introduced in the 70’s as they are rich source of growth factors like Platelet Derived Growth Factor (PDGF), Insulin like Growth Factor (IGF), Transforming Growth Factor- β (TGFβ), which regulates the main events in tissue regeneration (9),(10). Choukroun et al was the first to develop Platelet Rich Factor (PRF) in France for specific use in oral and maxillofacial surgery (11). It have several advantages like ease in preparation and not requiring chemical manipulation of the blood, which makes it strictly an autologous preparation (12).

There are paucity of studies that compares the effectiveness of PRF and nanocrystalline calcium sulphate in intrabony defects. Hence this study aims to evaluate and compare the treatment of intrabony defects by using nanocrystalline calcium sulphate and PRF.

Material and Methods

A split mouth randomised clinical study was done in the Department of Periodontology D.A.P.M.R.V. Dental College Bangalore to evaluate and compare the efficacy of PRF and nanocrystalline calcium sulphate bone graft (NANOGEN®)in the treatment of intrabony defects. The study population was selected from the subjects visiting the Outpatient section of Department of Periodontics from November 2018 to May 2020. The Ethical clearance for the study was obtained from the Ethical Committee and review board of the institution( (285/VOL-2/2018). The participants were explained about the study and a written consent was obtained from each of the participants.

Inclusion criteria: Patients diagnosed with chronic periodontitis (AAP, 1999) and aged between 35 and 65 years (both sexes) (13). Each patient should have at least two sites with interproximal probing depth ≥5 mm following phase I therapy and also the sites exhibiting clinical evidence (patients maintaining good oral hygiene, gingival index score of less than 2.1 after two weeks of phase I therapy and radiographic evidence of intrabony defects ≥3 mm deep (14),(15).

Exclusion criteria: Subjects who have received periodontal flap/regenerative therapy within the past one year, pregnant and lactating patients, patients with uncontrolled diabetes and immuno-compromised patients, patients who were under antibiotics analgesics, steroids for the past three months, smokers and patients who demonstrated poor oral hygiene maintenance, with a gingival index score ≥2.1 after two weeks of phase I therapy were excluded from the study.

Sample size calculation: The sample size was estimated using the GPower software v. 3.1.9.2). Considering the effect size to be measured (d) at 80% for one tailed hypothesis, power of the study at 80% and the margin of the error at 10%, the total sample size needed was 30 (16).

Thirty surgical sites were selected and divided into two groups (Table/Fig 1):

Group I (n=15)- Those treated with open flap debridement along with nanocrystalline calcium sulphate
Group II (n=15)- Those treated open flap debridement along with PRF

Study Procedure

1. Presurgical procedures: Case history was recorded, clinical photographs were taken and study casts were made for all the patients. Routine lab investigations, complete hemogram and random blood sugar were done. Scaling and root planning was performed using hand and ultrasonic instruments. Trauma from occlusion, if present, was relieved. Adjunctive chemical plaque control in the form of chlorhexidine mouthwash 0.2% twice daily was advised. Patients were re-evaluated two weeks after phase I therapy.

Oral hygiene status was assessed using Plaque Index (Silness and Loe (1964)) and Gingival index (Loe and Silness (1963)) (17).

Customized acrylic stent was made for each patient to record PPD,CAL and GR using UNC 15 probe (Table/Fig 2).

For that an alginate impression was made using metallic tray for each patient .The models were made using dental stone. Customized acrylic stents were prepared on the model for each patient using auto polymerizing acrylic resin. Vertical guiding grooves were made on the stent at the defect site to guide probe penetration with the same position and angulation, thereby providing a well defined and reproducible clinical measurement at each site for examination. All parameters were assessed at baseline (during surgery) and after three months and six months post surgery.

Measurements will be recorded from:

Stent to cementoenamel junction-A
Stent to gingival margin-B
Stent to deepest probing depth at test sites-C

2. Calculation of the parameters (18):

Probing pocket depth (PPD)= Stent to deepest probing depth at test sites (C)-Stent to gingival margin (B)

Clinical Attachment Level (CAL)= Stent to deepest probing depth at test sites (C)-Stent to Cementoenamel Junction (A)

Gingival recession= Stent to gingival margin (B)-Stent to Cementoenamel junction (A)

Intraoral periapical radiographs were taken with radiographic grid using long cone paralleling technique at baseline (during surgery) and after three months and six months post surgery to assess the Depth Of the Defect (DOD) and Bone Fill (BF) (Table/Fig 3).

The depth of the bone defect was assessed to the closest 0.5 mm on the intraoral periapical radiograph.A horizontal line was drawn projecting from the point on the bone crest designated as ‘A’. The horizontal line was drawn perpendicular to the long axis of the root surface of the tooth associated with the vertical defect and the point of contact of the horizontal line with the root surface was designated as ‘B’. A vertical line was then drawn from ‘B’ to the most coronal level along the root surface where the periodontal ligament space was considered to have a normal width; the point was designated as ‘C’. The vertical dimension between ‘B’ and ‘C’ was measured to assess the bone level and bone fill was calculated by taking the difference between baseline radiograph and 6 months radioghraph.

3. Surgical protocol: Following administration of LA (2% lignocaine hydrochloride with 1 in 80,000 adrenaline) acrylic stent was placed and PPD and CAL and GR were recorded to the nearest millimeter with the help of a University of North Carolina (UNC) 15 probe. (size. site and type of defect were different for different patient). After that buccal and lingual or palatal crevicular incisions were made using a no. 15 sterile surgical blade. A full thickness mucoperiosteal flap was reflected with molt no. 9 periosteal elevator. Careful defect debridement and root planing were done using ultrasonic instruments and area specific curettes (Gracey curettes, Hu- Friedy, Chicago, IL, USA), following which the surgical site was completely irrigated with povidone iodine. Before the placement of the graft or PRF, a 3-0 non resorbable braided silk suture was passed through the buccal and palatal or lingual papillae and the suture was left loose. This was done in order to prevent removal of the graft particles/ PRF by the passage of the needle and suture material.

4. Preparation of PRF: The PRF was prepared using Choukroun’s protocol (11). About 5 mL of patient’s intravenous blood was drawn and centrifuged at 3000 rpm for 10 minutes in a table top centrifuge. A top layer of acellular plasma (Platelet Poor Plasma-PPP) and bottom layer of red corpuscles was formed (Table/Fig 4)a. Between these two layers, a structured fibrin clot was found that was removed along with a small layer Red Blood Cell (RBC) present at the bottom using tweezer and scissors and then transferred to a sterile dappen dish (Table/Fig 4)b.

Group I patients received nanocrystalline calcium sulphate bone graft [NANOGEN®] while group II patients received PRF. The graft material was mixed with saline and the defect was filled till the rim of the defect (Table/Fig 5)a-f. The suturing was then completed and non eugenol periodontal dressing (Coe pack™, GC America Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) was placed for one week.

5. Post-surgical care: Suitable antibiotics and analgesics were prescribed. [Tablet ciprofloxacin (500 mg)+tinidazole (600 mg), two times daily for five days and tablet aceclofenac (100 mg) +paracetamol/acetaminophen (325 mg) +serratopeptidase (15 mg) twice daily for three days]. Patients were advised to rinse with chlorhexidine digluconate (0.2%) twice a day for two weeks following surgery and advised not to brush the surgical site for 7-10 days. Periodontal dressing and sutures were removed one week after surgery. Patients were instructed to use soft toothbrush and not to floss and use any interdental aids in the area for four weeks. Each patient was reinstructed for proper oral hygiene measures at every recall review.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) for Windows Version 22.0 Released 2013. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp was used to perform statistical analyses. Independent Studentt-test were used to compare the mean clinical and radiological parameters at baseline and post intervention time intervals between 2 groups. Repeated measures of ANOVA followed by Bonferroni Post hoc Analysis were used to compare clinical and radiological parameters between time groups in each study group. The level of significance was set at p<0.05.

Results

Total 15 patients were selected in each group, of which 10 were male patients and 5 were female patients. Of the selected 15 patients, mean age of the patients were 39.3 years.

Plaque Index (PI)

On intragroup comparison mean plaque index scores for group I and II at baseline, three months and six months were 1.49±0.18,1.13±0.18,1.11±0.20 and 1.49±0.18, 1.14±0.19 and 1.14±0.23 respectively. The mean difference in PI was not statistically significant between baseline and three month and baseline and six months in both groups (p-value for group I=0.91 and group II=1.00). On intergroup comparison the mean difference in the values between two groups showed no significant difference at any time interval (p>0.05) (Table/Fig 6).

Gingival Index (GI)

On intragroup comparison mean gingival index scores for group I and II at baseline, three months and six months were 1.62±0.21, 1.24±0.17 and 1.20±0.15 and 1.62±0.21, 1.23±0.17, 1.22± 0.24 respectively. The mean difference in GI was statistically significant between baseline and three months and baseline and six months in group I (p-value for group I =0.04) and not significant in group II. On intergroup comparison, the mean difference in the values between two groups showed no significant difference at any time interval (p>0.05) (Table/Fig 7).

Probing Pocket Depth (PPD)

On intragroup comparison mean PPD for group I and II at baseline, three months and six months were 9.4±1.77,5.13±0.83 ,4.67± 0.90 and 9.33±2.19, 5.93±1.22, 5.87±1.46 respectively.The mean difference in PPD was statistically significant between baseline and three months and baseline and six months in group I (p-value for group I =0.04). On intergroup comparison the mean difference in the values between two groups at baseline, three months and six months were -0.07, -0.80 and -1.20 respectively (Table/Fig 8). Group I showed statistically significant decrease in PPD at three months and six months when compared to group II (p-value=0.01).

Gingival Recession (GR)

On intragroup comparison mean GR for group I and II at baseline, three months and six months were 1.00±0.00, 1.08±0.29, 1.17±0.39 and 1.00±0.00, 1.14±0.36, 1.14±0.36 respectively. Both groups showed increase in gingival recession from baseline to three months and remained the same at six months. The mean difference in gingival recession was not statistically significant between all the time intervals in both groups (p-value=0.36). On intergroup comparison the mean difference in the values between two groups at three months and six months were -0.06 and 0.03 respectively (Table/Fig 9). The difference in the mean gingival recession was found to be not statistically significant between all the time intervals (p-value=0.87).

Clinical Attachment Level (CAL)

On intragroup comparison mean CAL for group I and II at baseline, 3 months and 6 months were 9.87±1.77, 5.93±1.22, 5.47±1.19 and 9.93±1.77, 6.93±1.49, 6.87±1.69 respectively. The mean difference in CAL was statistically significant between baseline and three months and baseline and six months in both groups (p-value for group I=0.04 and group II=0.01). On intergroup comparison the mean difference in the values between two groups at baseline, three months and six months were -0.06, -1.00 and -1.40 respectively (Table/Fig 10). The differences were statistically significant at three months and six months with group I showing a greater gain in CAL (p-value=0.01).

Depth of Defect (DOD) and Bone Fill (BF)

On intragroup comparison mean DOD for group I and II at baseline, three months and six months were 7.20±1.15, 4.60±1.35, 4.07±1.79 and 6.80±1.15, 5.20±2.08, 5.53±1.96 respectively.The mean difference in DOD was not statistically significant between baseline and three months, baseline and six months in both groups (p-value for group I =0.45 and group II =0.17). On Intergroup comparison the mean difference in the values between two groups at baseline, three months and six months were 0.40, -0.60 and -1.46 respectively which was statistically significant at six months (Table/Fig 11),(12). At six months mean depth of defect was significantly lesser in test group as compared to control group and the difference was statistically significant (p-value=0.04.)

At six month’s period the mean amount of bone fill in group I was 3.13 and group II was 1.20. Bone fill in group I was significantly higher as compared to group II and the difference was statistically significant (p-value=0.002).

Discussion

The result of present study showed that both nano crystalline calcium sulphate and PRF resulted in improvement in clinical parameters. The main aim of periodontal regeneration is the formation of new tooth-supporting tissues including cementum, PDL, and alveolar bone on a previously diseased root surface. Many materials that are available in the market have shown promising results. Among this newer regenerative materials are PepGen P-15, GEM 21S®, hydrogels, nanofibrous scaffolds, nano/ microspheres, and multiphase scaffolds (19),(20),(21).

Calcium sulphate hemihydrate is completely synthetic, biocompatible, biodegradable and a highly osteoconductive material and is the only bone graft that possesses hemostatic, angiogenic and barrier membrane properties. It is a potent vehicle for delivery of growth factor and can be used along with other bone graft materials (22). Strocchi R et al., (2002) demonstrated the ingrowth of blood vessels into the defects loaded with calcium sulfate than those with autograft (23). Several drugs like Tobramycin (Beardmore AA et al., in 2005), Simvastatin (Nyan M et al., in 2007) and Daptomycin (Webb ND et al., in 2008) have been delivered locally through calcium sulfate (24),(25),(26).

But calcium sulphate dissolves rapidly at a rate of 1 mm per week. At times, its degradation outpaces the rate of new bone growth into the defect. To overcome this nanocrystalline calcium sulfate particles based bone graft was developed (27).

Particles of nano crystalline calcium sulphate consist of densely packed grains of calcium sulfate in smaller particle size. These particles degrade in 12 to 14 weeks compared to standard calcium sulphate which degrade in four to six weeks. Hence nanocrystalline calcium sulphate has advantages like sustained release with slower rate of resorption as compared to medical grade calcium sulphate (8).

There are many natural materials used for periodontal regeneration. Among them PRF is one natural scaffold which showed promising results. PRF predominantly consists of a fibrin matrix rich in platelet and leukocyte, cytokines such as IL-1, IL-4, and IL-6, and growth factors. Fibrin gels are formed in the the final stage of the coagulation cascade in which fibrinogen molecules self assemble into a highly biocompatible three dimensional fiber network. The combination of fibrins and cytokines within PRF makes it a strong bio scaffold with an integrated reservoir of growth factors for tissue regeneration (28).

The PPD, CAL and GR were assessed using a UNC 15 probe positioned along a customized acrylic stent for providing a reproducible insertion axis for the probe. In a study by Watts T, probing depth and CEJ assessed by a constant force probe with and without stent. The result showed that stent to CEJ showed the maximum reproducibility (53%) of the simple measurements (29).

The depth of the intrabony defects was assessed with intraoral periapical radiographs using radiographic grid. Radiographic grid reduces the inaccuracy behind manual assessment of bone-fill and the overestimation of BF, and it may be attributed to the enhanced sensitivity of the method (30). Tobak GA et al., conducted a study to assess the accuracy of radiographic grid and concluded that radiographic measurements using grid had significantly reduced the inaccuracy in comparison with conventional methods (30).

Plaque index and gingival index showed statistically significant decrease from baseline to three months and baseline to six months in group I and group II. No statistically significant difference were found among two groups. The improvement in gingival and plaque status may be due to good patient compliance. These results were in agreement with the studies conducted by Slots DE et al., and Stein JM et al,which showed improvement in gingival and plaque status in all the patients who maintained good oral hygiene (31),(32).

The GR increased from base line to three months and after that it remained constant at six months in both groups. The reason for increase in GR may be because of the gingival shrinkage during the healing period. These results were in agreement with the studies of Aichelmann-Reidy ME et al., (33).

Both groups showed statistically significant reduction in PPD at three months and six months. In intergroup comparison group I showed statistically significant reduction in pocket depth compared to group II at all time intervals. In group I patients this findings were in consistence with studies done by Das EC et al, Park YB et al., (34),(35). These studies showed that greater PD reduction seen in patients treated with calcium sulphate based bone graft materials. In group II patients the finding were in agreement with the previous studies done by Choukroun J et al., and Dohan Ehrenfest DM et al., (11),(28).

Similarly, gain in CAL were observed in both groups. In intergroup comparison group I showed statistically significant gain in CAL compared to group II at all time intervals.

Fibroblast growth factor is released in an active form from calcium sulphate and the release of the growth factor was directly proportional to the degradation rate of calcium sulphate, which facilitates migration of gingival fibroblasts and cell attachment and spreading, resulting in decrease of PPD and gain of CAL (Rosenbulum SF et al.,) (36). In Group II patients, PD reduction and CAL gain may be related to the elevated concentrations of polypeptide growth factors, which might have enhanced soft tissue healing (28).

This study also assessed DOD and BF. Both groups showed statistically significant decrease in DOD and increase in BF. In intergroup comparison Group I showed statistically significant reduction in DOD and increase in BF compared to group II at all time intervals. This improvement in parameters in both groups may be due to decrease in inflammation and regenerative potential of both nanocrystalline calcium sulphate bone graft and PRF (18). Proper patient selection and patient compliance might be other reasons. In group I patients, these results were consistent with study done by Pandit N et al., Reddy MS et al., Couri CJ et al., and Paolontonio M et al., (18),(37),(38),(39). In group II patients the results are in accordance with study conducetd by Patel GK et al., Chandradas ND et al., Pradeep AR et al., Suwondo CI and Galav S et al., (40),(41),(42),(43),(44).

The reason for group I showing better statistically significant improvement in parameters like PPD, CAL and BF, when compared to group II may be due to the hemostatic, angiogenic barrier membrane properties, slow resorption rate and sustained release of nanocrystalline calcium sulphate (23),(45),(46). Also the surface area of nanocrystalline calcium sulphate was about 10 times greater than that of a conventional micron sized form which allows for greater absorption of growth factors, higher surface area for attachment of osseous cells and more efficient osteoconductivity (47). But more multicenter randomised controlled clinical trial with large sample size will be required to confirm this result. Many similar studies in comparison to present study have been tabulated in (Table/Fig 13) (11),(18),(28),(31),(32),(33),(34),(35),(36), (38),(39),(40),(41),(42),(43),(44).

Limitation(s)

The major limitation of the present study is its small sample size which is inadequate to evaluate the efficacy of graft material and also the intrabony defects included in our study differed in their dimension i.e the width and depth. The treatment outcome is influenced by the differences in the dimensions of the defect.

Conclusion

Treatment with both PRF and nanocrystalline calcium sulphate bone graft (NanoGen®) resulted in significant improvement in all parameters except gingival recession at all time intervals. In intergroup comparison, nanocrystalline calcium sulphate bone graft (NanoGen®) showed better improvement in parameters like PPD,CAL and BF at all time intervals. Hence according to this study nanocrystalline calcium sulphate bone graft can be preferred over PRF as a regenerative material, especially in case of deep intrabony defects. But in situations which require more economical and easily available regenerative material, PRF can be preferred.

References

1.
Kinane DF, Stathopoulou PG, Papapanou PN. Periodontal diseases. Nature Reviews Disease Primers. 2017;3(1):01-04. [crossref] [PubMed]
2.
World Health Organization. Epidemiology, etiology, and prevention of periodontal diseases: report of a WHO scientific group [meeting held in Moscow from 23 November to 2 December 1977]. World Health Organization; 1978.
3.
Ivanovski S. Periodontal regeneration. Australian dental Journal. 2009;54:S118-28. [crossref] [PubMed]
4.
Dimova C, Evrosimovska B, Zlatanovska K, Zarkova J. Alveolar Augmentation Using Different Bone Substitutes. In: Antoniac I. (eds) Handbook of Bioceramics and Biocomposites. Cham: Springer; 2015. [crossref]
5.
Mukherji A, Rath SK. Calcium sulfate in periodontics: A time tested versatile alloplast. J SciSoc. 2016;43:18-23. [crossref]
6.
Thomas MV, Puleo DA. Calcium sulfate: properties and clinical applications. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part B: Applied Biomaterials: An Official Journal of The Society for Biomaterials, The Japanese Society for Biomaterials, and The Australian Society for Biomaterials and the Korean Society for Biomaterials. 2009;88(2):597-10. [crossref] [PubMed]
7.
Apaydin ES, Torabinejad M. The effect of calcium sulfate on hard-tissue healing after periradicular surgery. Journal of endodontics. 2004;30(1):17-20. [crossref] [PubMed]
8.
Jain A, Chaturvedi R, Pahuja B. Comparative evaluation of the efficacy of calcium sulfate bone grafts in crystalline and nano-crystalline forms in fresh extraction socket sites: A radiographic and histological pilot study. International Journal of Oral Implantology and Clinical Research. 2012;3(1):58-61. [crossref]
9.
Marx RE. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP): what is PRP and what is not PRP? Implant Dent. 2001;10:225-28. [crossref] [PubMed]
10.
Gassling V, Douglas T, Warnke PH, Açil Y, Wiltfang J, Becker ST. Platelet rich fibrin membranes as scaffolds for periosteal tissue engineering. Clin Oral Implant Res. 2010;543-49. [crossref] [PubMed]
11.
Choukroun J, Diss A, Simonpieri A, Girard MO, Schoeffler C, Dohan SL, et al. Platelet-rich fibrin (PRF): A second-generation platelet concentrate. Part V: histologic evaluations of PRF effects on bone allograft maturation in sinus lift. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology. 2006;101(3):299-03. [crossref] [PubMed]
12.
Preeja C, Arun S. Platelet-rich fibrin: Its role in periodontal regeneration. The Saudi Journal for Dental Research. 2014;5(2):117-22. [crossref]
13.
Armitage GC. Development of a classification system for periodontal diseases and conditions. Ann Periodontol. 1999;4:01-06. [crossref] [PubMed]
14.
Dsa E, Chatterjee A, Shetty DN, Pradeep AR. Clinical evaluation and comparison of platelet-rich fibrin and injectable platelet-rich fibrin (sticky bone) in the treatment of intrabony defects. Nigerian Journal of Experimental and Clinical Biosciences. 2020;8(2):78. [crossref]
15.
Pavani MP, Reddy KR, Reddy BH, Biraggari SK, Babu CH, Chavan V. Evaluation of platelet-rich fibrin and tricalcium phosphate bone graft in bone fill of intrabony defects using cone-beam computed tomography: A randomized clinical trial. Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology. 2021;25(2):138. [crossref] [PubMed]
16.
Sharma A, Pradeep AR. Treatment of 3-Wall Intrabony Defects in Patients with Chronic Periodontitis with Autologous Platelet-Rich Fibrin: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. Journal of Periodontology. 2011:82(12);1705-12. [crossref] [PubMed]
17.
Löe H. The gingival index, the plaque index and the retention index systems. Journal of Periodontology. 1967;38(6 Part II):610-16. [crossref]
18.
Pandit N, Sharma A, Jain A, Bali D, Malik R, Gugnani S. The use of nanocrystalline and two other forms of calcium sulfate in the treatment of infrabony defects: A clinical and radiographic study. Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology. 2015;19(5):545. [crossref] [PubMed]
19.
Ausenda F, Rasperini G, Acunzo R, Gorbunkova A, Pagni G. New perspectives in the use of biomaterials for periodontal regeneration. Materials. 2019;12(13):2197. [crossref] [PubMed]
20.
Figueiredo M, Henriques J, Martins G, Guerra F, Judas F, Figueiredo H. Physicochemical characterization of biomaterials commonly used in dentistry as bone substitutes-comparison with human bone. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part B: Applied Biomaterials: An Official Journal of The Society for Biomaterials, The Japanese Society for Biomaterials, and The Australian Society for Biomaterials and the Korean Society for Biomaterials. 2010;92(2):409-19. [crossref] [PubMed]
21.
Young CS, Ladd PA, Browning CF, Thompson A, Bonomo J, Shockley K, et al. Release, biological potency, and biochemical integrity of recombinant human platelet-derived growth factor-BB (rhPDGF-BB) combined with AugmentTM Bone Graft or GEM 21S beta-tricalcium phosphate (??? -TCP). Journal of controlled release. 2009;140(3):250-55. [crossref] [PubMed]
22.
Orthogencorp.com [homepage on the internet]. New Jersey: Orthogen LLC; 2008. Available from: http://www.orthogencorp.com/CS/ properties.html.
23.
Strocchi R, Orsini G, Iezzi G, Scarano A, Rubini C, Pecora G, et al. Bone regeneration with calcium sulfate: Evidence for increased angiogenesis in rabbits. J Oral Implantol. 2002;28(6):273-78. 2.3.CO;2>[crossref]
24.
Nyan M, Sato D, Oda M, Machida T, Kobayashi H, Nakamura T, et al. Bone formation with the combination of simvastatin and calcium sulfate in critical sized rat calvarial defect. J Pharmacol Sci. 2007;104:384-86. [crossref] [PubMed]
25.
Beardmore AA, Brooks DE, Wenke JC, Thomas DB. Effectiveness of local antibiotic delivery with an osteoinductive and osteoconductive bone graft substitute. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:107-12. [crossref] [PubMed]
26.
Webb ND, McCanless JD, Courtney HS, Bungardner JD, Haggard WO. Daptomycin eluted from calcium sulfate appears effective against staphylococcus. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466:1383-87. [crossref]
27.
Ricci JL, Weiner MJ, Iorio DD, Mamidwar S, Alexander H. Evaluation of timed release calcium sulfate (CS-TR) bone graft substitutes. Microsc Microanal. 2005;11:1256-57. [crossref]
28.
Dohan Ehrenfest DM, de Peppo GM, Doglioli P, Sammartino G. Slow release of growth factors and thrombospondin-1 in Choukroun’s platelet-rich fibrin (PRF): A gold standard to achieve for all surgical platelet concentrates technologies. Growth factors. 2009;27(1):63-69. [crossref] [PubMed]
29.
Watts T. Constant force probing with and without a stent in untreated periodontal disease: The clinical reproducibility problem and possible sources of error. Journal of Clinical Periodontology. 1987;14(7):407-11. [crossref] [PubMed]
30.
Toback GA, Brunsvold MA, Nummikoski PV, Masters LB, Mellonig JT, Cochran DL. The accuracy of radiographic methods in assessing the outcome of periodontal regenerative therapy. J Periodontol. 1999;70(12):1479-89. [crossref] [PubMed]
31.
Slot DE, Valkenburg C, Van der Weijden GA. Mechanical plaque removal of periodontal maintenance patients: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. J ClinPeriodontol. 2020;47:107-24. [crossref] [PubMed]
32.
Stein JM, Lammert F, Zimmer V, Granzow M, Reichert S, Schulz S, et al. Clinical Periodontal and Microbiologic Parameters in Patients With Crohn’s Disease With Consideration of the CARD15 Genotype. Journal of Periodontology. 2010;81:535-45. [crossref] [PubMed]
33.
Aichelmann-Reidy ME, Heath CD, Reynolds MA. Clinical evaluation of calcium sulfate in combination with demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft for the treatment of human intraosseous defects. J Periodontol. 2004;75:340-47. [crossref] [PubMed]
34.
Das EC, Kumary TV, Anil Kumar PR, Komath M. Calcium sulfate-based bioactive cement for periodontal regeneration: An In Vitro study. Indian J Dent Res. 2019;30:558-67. [crossref] [PubMed]
35.
Park YB, Mohan K, Al-Sanousi A, Almaghrabi B, Genco RJ, Swihart MT, et al. Synthesis and characterization of nanocrystalline calcium sulfate for use in osseous regeneration. Biomedical Materials. 2011;6(5):055007. [crossref] [PubMed]
36.
Rosenblum SF, Frenkel S, Ricci JR, Alexander H. Diffusion of fibroblast growth factor from a plaster of Paris carrier. J Appl Biomater. 1993;4:67-72. [crossref] [PubMed]
37.
Reddy MS, Aichelmann-Reidy ME, Avila-Ortiz G, Klokkevold PR, Murphy KG, Rosen PS, et al. Periodontal regeneration-furcation defects: A consensus report from the AAP Regeneration Workshop. Journal of Periodontology. 2015;86:S131-33. [crossref] [PubMed]
38.
Couri CJ, Maze GI, Hinkson DW, Collins III BH, Dawson DV. Medical grade calcium sulfate hemihydrate versus expanded polytetrafluoroethylene in the treatment of mandibular class II furcations. Journal of Periodontology. 2002;73(11):1352-59. [crossref] [PubMed]
39.
Paolantonio M, Perinetti G, Dolci M, Perfetti G, Tetè S, Sammartino G, et al. Surgical treatment of periodontal intrabony defects with calcium sulfate implant and barrier versus collagen barrier or open flap debridement alone: A 12-month randomized controlled clinical trial. Journal of Periodontology. 2008;79(10):1886-93. [crossref] [PubMed]
40.
Patel GK, Gaekwad SS, Gujjari SK, Veerendra Kumar SC. Platelet-rich fibrin in regeneration of intrabony defects: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Periodontology. 2017;88(11):1192-99. [crossref] [PubMed]
41.
Chandradas ND, Ravindra S, Rangaraju VM, Jain S, Dasappa S. Efficacy of platelet rich fibrin in the treatment of human intrabony defects with or without bone graft: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community Dentistry. 2016;6(Suppl 2):S153. [crossref] [PubMed]
42.
Pradeep AR, Bajaj P, Rao NS, Agarwal E, Naik SB. Platelet-rich fibrin combined with a porous hydroxyapatite graft for the treatment of 3-wall intrabony defects in chronic periodontitis: A randomized controlled clinical trial. Journal of Periodontology. 2017;88(12):1288-96. [crossref] [PubMed]
43.
Suwondo CI, Herawati D, Sudibyo S. Effect of advanced platelet-rich fibrin applications on periodontal regeneration in infrabony pocket treatment. Majalah Kedokteran Gigi Indonesia. 2018;4(3):154-60. [crossref]
44.
Galav S, Chandrashekar KT, Mishra R, Tripathi V, Agarwal R, Galav A. Comparative evaluation of platelet-rich fibrin and autogenous bone graft for the treatment of infrabony defects in chronic periodontitis: Clinical, radiological, and surgical reentry. Indian Journal of Dental Research. 2016;27(5):502. [crossref] [PubMed]
45.
Walsh WR, Morberg P, Yu Y, Yang JL, Haggard W, Sheath P, et al. Response of a calcium sulfate bone graft substitute in a confined cancellous defect. Clin OrthopRelat Res 2003;(406):228-36. [crossref]
46.
Toloue SM, Chesnoiu Matei I, Blanchard SB. A clinical and histomorphometric study of calcium sulfate compared with freeze-dried bone allograft for alveolar ridge preservation. Journal of periodontology. 2012;83(7):847-55. [crossref] [PubMed]
47.
Mazor Z, Mamidwar S. Effect of Nanocrystalline Calcium Sulfate Bone Graft in a Bilateral Sinus Augmentation Procedure: A Case Report. Clinical Advances in Periodontics. 2015;5(1):76-81. [crossref] [PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2022/52921.16498

Date of Submission: Oct 18, 2021
Date of Peer Review: Jan 22, 2022
Date of Acceptance: Apr 12, 2022
Date of Publishing: Jun 01, 2022

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. Yes

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Oct 22, 2021
• Manual Googling: Apr 11, 2022
• iThenticate Software: Apr 21, 2022 (24%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com