Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
The purpose of this study was to compare two minimally invasive surgical techniques (MISTs) for the treatment of periodontal defects: (1) guided tissue regeneration (GTR) using resorbable minimembrane and particulate xenograft (DBBM); and (2) inductive periodontal regeneration (IPR) using enamel matrix derivatives and DBBM. A sample of 20 infrabony periodontal defects in 20 patients were randomly assigned to either the GTR or the IPR group. A follow-up was performed at 12 months postoperative. Significant improvement in clinical parameters was observed in both groups, although no intergroup differences were found. MIST with GTR or IPR demonstrated very good outcomes 1 year after surgery, with no differences between treatment groups.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.11607/prd.2550 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!