The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Improved wound stability with a modified minimally invasive surgical technique in the regenerative treatment of isolated interdental intrabony defects
Abstract
Aims: This paper describes a modified surgical approach of the minimally invasive surgical technique (modified minimally invasive surgical technique, M‐MIST) and preliminarily evaluates its applicability and clinical performances in the treatment of isolated deep intrabony defects in combination with amelogenins. Material and Methods: Twenty deep isolated intrabony defects in 20 patients were studied. Fifteen were surgically accessed with the M‐MIST, while in five sites, which presented a lingual intrabony component, the conventional MIST had to be applied. The M‐MIST consisted of a buccal incision of the defect‐associated papilla, according to the principles of the papilla preservation techniques. Only a buccal flap was raised while the interdental papilla was left in situ. The granulation tissue filling the defect was dissected and removed, leaving the interdental and palatal tissues untouched. Root instrumentation and application of the regenerative material were performed before suturing. Primary closure of the flaps was attained with a single internal modified mattress suture. Surgery was performed with the aid of an operating microscope and microsurgical instruments. Results: The surgical chair‐time of the M‐MIST‐treated sites (N=15) was 56±8.64 min. Early wound healing was uneventful: primary wound closure was attained and maintained in all sites. No oedema or haematoma was noted. Patients did not report pain or discomfort. The 1‐year clinical attachment level (CAL) gain was 4.5±1.4 mm in defects 6±1.5 mm deep. Residual probing depths (PDs) were 3.1±0.6 mm. A minimal increase of 0.1±0.3 mm in gingival recession between baseline and 1 year was observed. Conclusions: M‐MIST was applicable on 15 isolated interproximal defects out of 20 selected ones. It resulted in very limited patient morbidity and excellent clinical improvements. These outcomes should be confirmed in a larger study.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Treatment of stage I–III periodontitis—The EFP S3 level clinical practice guideline
Sanz, M., Herrera, D., Kebschull, M., Chapple, I., Jepsen, S., Berglundh, T., Sculean, A., Tonetti, M. S., & Consultants, E. W. P. A. M. (2020) · Journal of Clinical Periodontology · doi:10.1111/jcpe.13290 · Cited by 1,934
Self-citationNonsurgical and surgical treatment of periodontitis: how many options for one disease?
Graziani, F., Karapetsa, D., Alonso, B., & Herrera, D. (2017) · Periodontology 2000 · doi:10.1111/prd.12201 · Cited by 566
Surgical and nonsurgical periodontal therapy. Learned and unlearned concepts
Heitz‐Mayfield, L. J. A., & Lang, N. P. (2013) · Periodontology 2000 · doi:10.1111/prd.12008 · Cited by 336
Periodontal Regeneration – Intrabony Defects: A Systematic Review From the AAP Regeneration Workshop
Kao, R. T., Nares, S., & Reynolds, M. A. (2015) · Journal of Periodontology · doi:10.1902/jop.2015.130685 · Cited by 330
Metadata
- Authors
- Cortellini, P., & Tonetti, M. S.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Periodontology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2009-01-22
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 157-163
- ISSN
- 0303-6979 (ISSN-L)
- 1600-051X
- OpenAlex
- W2049241001
- Cited by
- 266
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 8.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Improved wound stability with a modified minimally invasive surgical technique in the regenerative treatment of isolated interdental intrabony defects. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1600-051x.2008.01352.x
- The paper
- Cortellini, P., & Tonetti, M. S. (2009). Improved wound stability with a modified minimally invasive surgical technique in the regenerative treatment of isolated interdental intrabony defects. Journal of Clinical Periodontology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051x.2008.01352.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.