Puros™ vs. Demineralized Freeze-dried Bone in Human Periodontal Osseous Defects

Objective: To compare a specially processed, non-demineralized, non-freeze-dried bone allograft (Puros™) and demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft (DFDBA) in human periodontal osseous defects. Methods: Following appropriate initial preparation procedures, flap surgery with defect and root debridement and root conditioning was performed in 19 patients. Following surgical site preparation, two osseous defects per patient were randomly treated with each bone replacement graft material. Appropriate periodontal maintenance schedules were followed, and at 6-7 months re-entry flap surgery was performed for documentation and finalization of treatment. Results: Wilcoxon Sign Ranks test analysis of patient mean values revealed that the Puros grafts demonstrated better mean defect fill of 2.9 mm (70.4%) vs. a mean defect fill of 2.1 mm (52.9%) for defects treated with DFDBA (p=0.067). Intrapatient evaluation showed that Puros was the better (11/19) or equal (5/19) treatment in the 19 patients. Other hard tissue findings showed similar clinically superior results with the use of Puros. Relative defect fill results showed 84% frequency of positive (50%-100% defect fill) responses with Puros and 68% frequency of positive responses with DFDBA. There were 3 failures (minimal response) with DFDBA and none with Puros. Soft tissue findings showed no significant differences among treatments. Conclusion: These results suggest that the use of Puros bone replacement graft material yields better clinical results than DFDBA in human periodontal defects.

Supported by Zimmer Dental, Research and Grants Committee of the Louisiana State University School of Dentistry Grant Number: PP2103, and the LSU Periodontics Miscellaneous Donors Fund