Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 330

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 78 of the 78 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Periodontal Regeneration – Intrabony Defects: A Systematic Review From the AAP Regeneration Workshop

Kao, Richard T., Nares, Salvador, Reynolds, Mark A.·2015·Journal of Periodontology

Abstract

Background: Previous systematic reviews of periodontal regeneration with bone replacement grafts and guided tissue regeneration (GTR) were defined as state of the art for clinical periodontal regeneration as of 2002. Methods: The purpose of this systematic review is to update those consensus reports by reviewing periodontal regeneration approaches developed for the correction of intrabony defects with the focus on patient‐, tooth‐, and site‐centered factors, surgical approaches, surgical determinants, and biologics. This review adheres to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses) guidelines for systematic reviews. A computerized search of the PubMed and Cochrane databases was performed to evaluate the clinically available regenerative approaches for intrabony defects. The search included screening of original reports, review articles, and reference lists of retrieved articles and hand searches of selected journals. All searches were focused on clinically available regenerative approaches with histologic evidence of periodontal regeneration in humans published in English. For topics in which the literature is lacking, non‐randomized observational and experimental animal model studies were used. Therapeutic endpoints examined included changes in clinical attachment level, changes in bone level/fill, and probing depth. For purposes of analysis, change in bone fill was used as the primary outcome measure, except in cases in which this information was not available. The SORT (Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy) grading scale was used in evaluating the body of knowledge. Results: 1) Fifty‐eight studies provided data on patient, tooth, and surgical‐site considerations in the treatment of intrabony defects. 2) Forty‐five controlled studies provided outcome analysis on the use of biologics for the treatment of intrabony defects. Conclusions: 1) Biologics (enamel matrix derivative and recombinant human platelet‐derived growth factor‐BB plus β‐tricalcium phosphate) are generally comparable with demineralized freeze‐dried bone allograft and GTR and superior to open flap debridement procedures in improving clinical parameters in the treatment of intrabony defects. 2) Histologic evidence of regeneration has been demonstrated with laser therapy; however, data are limited on clinical predictability and effectiveness. 3) Clinical outcomes appear most appreciably influenced by patient behaviors and surgical approach rather than by tooth and defect characteristics. 4) Long‐term studies indicate that improvements in clinical parameters are maintainable up to 10 years, even in severely compromised teeth, consistent with a favorable/good long‐term prognosis.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1902/jop.2015.130685

Cites

78 of 78 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

1 retracted

Show all 78 references

Cited by

See all 330

Metadata

Authors
Kao, R. T., Nares, S., & Reynolds, M. A.
Venue
Journal of Periodontology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-02
Volume
86
Issue
2S
Pages
S77-104
ISSN
  • 0022-3492 (ISSN-L)
  • 1943-3670
OpenAlex
W1993763059
Cited by
330
References
78
FWCI
4.29
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: Periodontal Regeneration – Intrabony Defects: A Systematic Review From the AAP Regeneration Workshop. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1902/jop.2015.130685
The paper
Kao, R. T., Nares, S., & Reynolds, M. A. (2015). Periodontal Regeneration – Intrabony Defects: A Systematic Review From the AAP Regeneration Workshop. Journal of Periodontology. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2015.130685

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.