Clinical comparison of the effectiveness of novel sonic instruments and curettes for periodontal debridement after 2 months

Analysing root roughness and smear layer relationship by comparing contemporary dental curettes with conventional dental curettes: a randomised controlled trial

Background

Root debridement procedures for the treatment of periodontal diseases, produces root surface irregularities and smear layer on the root surface that can adversely affect the healing of periodontal tissues. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the surface texture of root after hand instrumentation with Gracey curette, After Five curette, and Mini Five curette.

Methods

A randomised, controlled clinical trial was conducted with 120 participants clinically diagnosed with chronic periodontitis. Participants were equally randomised into four groups, with parallel treatment assignment of scaling and root planning using Gracey Curettes, After five and Mini five curette, and a control group with no instrumentation. Mobile teeth of these patients were then extracted atraumatically and analysed under a Scanning Electron Microscope and graded for "Roughness and Loss of Tooth substance index" and "Smear layer index." Cross Tabulation was made between the test groups (Control, Gracey Curette, After five, and Mini Five) versus "Roughness and Loss of Tooth substance Index" and "Smear Layer Index." A Chi-square test with Bonferroni correction was used to determine the graded distribution among the groups.

Results

In the control group, 73.3% of the teeth showed grade 1 roughness. In the Gracey group, 56.7% showed grade 2 roughness; in the After 5 group, 70% showed grade 3 roughness; in the Mini 5 group, 76.7% showed grade 3 roughness. A significant association was found between roughness scores and the use of individual instruments. Regarding smear layer formation, 46.7% of teeth showed a grade 4 smear layer in the control group. 50% of teeth showed grade 2 smear layer thickness in the Gracey group. In the After 5 group, 73.3% of teeth showed a grade 1 smear layer, while in the Mini 5 group, 80.0% showed a grade 1 smear layer. The use of individual instruments was significantly associated with the smear layer scores.

Conclusion

Gracey curettes produced relatively smoother root surfaces with less smear layer formation than After Five and Mini Five curettes, which produced relatively more roughened root surfaces with thicker smear layer formation.

Trial registration

ID: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04216966 Date of Registration: January 3, 2020.

Treating periodontitis-a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing ultrasonic and manual subgingival scaling at different probing pocket depths

BACKGROUND

Mechanical plaque removal has been commonly accepted to be the basis for periodontal treatment. This study aims to compare the effectiveness of ultrasonic and manual subgingival scaling at different initial probing pocket depths (PPD) in periodontal treatment.

METHODS

English-language databases (PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, Medline, and ClinicalTrials.gov, by January, 2019) were searched. Weighted mean differences in primary outcomes, PPD and clinical attachment loss (CAL) reduction, were estimated by random effects model. Secondary outcomes, bleeding on probing (BOP), gingival recession (GR), and post-scaling residual dental calculus, were analyzed by comparing the results of each study. The quality of RCTs was appraised with the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool. The GRADE approach was used to assess quality of evidence.

RESULTS

Ten randomized controlled trials were included out of 1434 identified. Initial PPD and follow-up periods formed subgroups. For 3-months follow-up: (1) too few shallow initial pocket studies available to draw a conclusion; (2) the heterogeneity of medium depth studies was so high that could not be merged to draw a conclusion; (3) deep pocket studies showed no statistical differences in PPD and CAL reduction between ultrasonic and manual groups. For 6-months follow-up: (1) too few shallow initial PPD studies to draw a conclusion; (2) at medium pocket depth, PPD reduction showed manual subgingival scaling better than ultrasound. No statistical differences were observed in CAL reduction between the two approaches; (3) for deep initial PPD studies, both PPD and CAL reduction showed manual subgingival scaling better. GR results indicated no statistical differences at medium and deep initial pocket studies between the two methods. BOP results showed more reduction at deep pocket depths with manual subgingival scaling. No conclusion could be drawn about residual dental calculus.

CONCLUSION

When initial PPD was 4-6 mm, PPD reduction proved manual subgingival scaling was superior, but CAL results showed no statistical differences between the two means. When initial PPD was ≥6 mm, PPD and CAL reductions suggested that manual subgingival scaling was superior.

Periodontal therapy

Periodontal disease is the most common disease in small animal patients. It not only creates severe localized infection, but it has been linked to numerous severe systemic maladies. Proper therapy of this disease process results in a significant increase in the overall health of the patient. The treatment of periodontal disease is currently evolving due to the acceptance of the specific plaque hypothesis of periodontal disease. These findings have led to the development of the "one-stage full-mouth disinfection" treatment as well as a vaccine against these organisms. However, the cornerstone of therapy is still meticulous plaque control. This control is achieved via a combination of regular dental prophylaxis and home care. With progressive disease, advanced periodontal surgery or extraction becomes necessary.

Periodontal healing after non-surgical therapy with a modified sonic scaler: a controlled clinical trial

AIM

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and microbiological healing outcomes following non-surgical periodontal therapy using a modified sonic scaler system versus scaling and root planing (S/RP) with hand instruments.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study comprised 20 chronic periodontitis patients. Using a split-mouth design, both treatment modalities were randomly applied to one quadrant of the upper and lower jaws. Clinical and microbiological parameters were assessed at baseline, 4 weeks, and 6 months after treatment. Furthermore, post-operative hypersensitivity was investigated. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test (alpha = 0.05) was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

With both therapy methods, periodontal conditions showed statistically significant clinical and microbiological improvements after 4 weeks and 6 months. Hypersensitive teeth were found only 4 weeks after S/RP. Besides a significantly better bleeding on probing reduction in deep S/RP sites and less time required for root instrumentation by the sonic scaler, no other clinical and microbiological parameters revealed significant differences between sites treated with the sonic scaler or S/RP.

CONCLUSION

The sonic scaler system and S/RP seem to provide similarly favourable periodontal healing results, although in deep pockets S/RP appeared to achieve a better resolution of inflammation.