Clinical Outcomes after Treatment of Periodontal Intrabony Defects with Nanocrystalline Hydroxyapatite (Ostim) or Enamel Matrix Derivatives (Emdogain): A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Table 1

Patient and defect characteristics at baseline.

Variable	Treatment		P value
	NHA group, 𝑁=19	EMD group, 𝑁=19
Age (years, mean ± SD)	50.9 ± 12.9	51.8±11.4	0.822*
Men/women (n)	12/7	8/11	0.194^†
Smoking habits
Nonsmoker (n/%)	11 (57.9)	17 (89.5)	0.063^‡
Former/occasional smoker (n/%)	8 (42.1)	2 (10.5)
PPD (mm, mean ± SD)	6.6±1.8	6.6±1.3	0.879*
RAL (mm, mean ± SD)	9.6±2.0	10.0±1.8	0.640*
Bone sounding (mm, mean ± SD)	11.8±1.9	11.9±2.0	0.867*
RGR (mm, mean ± SD)	2.9±1.3	3.3±1.1	0.352*
Measurements at defect sites
Defect depth (mm, mean ± SD)	6.5±1.6	5.6±1.8	0.117*
Defect width (mm, mean ± SD)	3.4±0.7	3.2±0.7	0.312*

EMD: enamel matrix derivate; NHA: nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite; PPD: probing pocket depths; RAL: relative attachment level; RGR: relative gingival recession.
∗Unpaired t-test, ^†𝜒² test, ^‡Fisher’s exact test.