Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 17, 2026

Half-segmental Diaphyseal Bone Defect Model in Rats for Evaluating Bone Substitute Performance in Load-bearing Regions
Published on: December 30, 2025
Comparative study of DFDBA in combination with enamel matrix derivative versus DFDBA alone for treatment of
Simone Domenico Aspriello1, Luigi Ferrante, Corrado Rubini
1Periodontology-Department of Clinical and Dental Sciences, Polytechnic University of the Marche, Via Tronto 10/a, Torrette di Ancona, Italy.
Abstract:
The aim of this randomized double-blind, clinical trial was to compare the use of enamel matrix derivative (EMD) and demineralised freeze-dried bone allografts (DFDBA) with DFDBA alone for the treatment of human periodontal intrabony defects at 12 months post-surgery. Fifty-six intrabony osseous defects in 56 periodontis patients were randomly assigned to the test group (DFDBA + EMD) or the control group (DFDBA) for periodontal treatment. Clinical and radiographic measurements were made at the baseline and after 12 months. Compared to baseline, the 12-month results indicated that both treatment modalities resulted in significant changes in all clinical parameters (gingival index, bleeding on probing, probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), gingival recession; P < 0.05) and radiographic parameters (hard tissue fill (HTF) and bone depth reduction; P <0.05). Furthermore, statistically significant differences were found in the test group compared to the control group in PD reduction (5.0 mm vs. 4.0 mm; P < 0.05), CAL gain (4.0 mm vs. 3.25 mm), and HTF (4.0 mm vs. 3.5 mm; P < 0.05). In the test group, 25% of sites gained > 4 mm of CAL, while in the control group, 7.1% of sites gained > 4 mm of CAL. Both treatments showed a good soft and hard periodontal tissue response. At 12 months post-surgery, the combined use of DFDBA and EMD seemed to produce a statistically significant improvement of PD reduction, CAL gain, and HTF.