Factors affecting decision making at reassessment of periodontitis. Part 4: treatment options for residual periodontal pockets

Extraction Socket Augmentation with Autologous Platelet-Rich Fibrin (PRF): The Rationale for Socket Augmentation

After tooth extraction, the alveolar ridge undergoes a physiological process of remodelling and disuse atrophy. Socket augmentation (SA) has been shown to preserve alveolar bone volume in order to facilitate implant placement and reduce the need for staged grafting at a later date. Although autogenic grafting has been shown to be the gold standard in bone regeneration, it has significant disadvantages. To prevent post-extraction volumetric alterations and alveolar bone resorption occurring, alternative grafting materials, including xenografts, alloplasts, and allografts, have been used successfully in fresh extraction sites. However, these materials act mostly as bio-scaffolds and require a slower integration period of 6-8 months prior to implant placement. Recently, the use of autologous platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) has been advocated alongside socket augmentation as a method of bio-enhancement of healing of soft and hard tissues. PRF contains platelet-derived growth factors, hormones, and bioactive components such as cytokines that have been shown to promote angiogenesis and tissue regeneration during wound healing. The aim of this article is to review the evidence base for the SA technique Clinical benefits of SA will be discussed with a reference to two cases. Therefore, this narrative review will discuss the post-extraction bone changes, the importance of SA, and the bio-enhancement role of PRF in the management of extraction site defects when the alternative technique of immediate implant placement is not possible or contraindicated.

Efficacy of Periodontal Endoscopy during Subgingival Debridement to Treat Periodontitis: A Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials

This study aims to evaluate the clinical efficacy of periodontal endoscopy (PEND) during subgingival debridement to treat periodontitis. A systematic review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) was performed. The search strategy included four databases: PubMed, Web of Sciences, Scopus, and Scielo. The initial online exploration generated 228 reports, and 3 RCTs met the selection criteria. These RCTs described a statistically significant decrease in probing depth (PD) in the PEND group compared to controls after 6 and 12 months of follow-up. The improvement in PD was 2.5 mm for PEND and 1.8 mm for the control groups, respectively (p < 0.05). It was also described that the PEND group presented a significantly inferior proportion of PD 7 to 9 mm at 12 months (0.5%) as compared to the control group (1.84%) (p = 0.03). All RCTs noted improvements in clinical attachment level (CAL). It was described as having significant differences in bleeding on probing (BOP) in favor of PEND, with an average reduction of 43% versus 21% in the control groups. Similarly, it was also presented that they were significant differences in plaque indices in favor of PEND. PEND during subgingival debridement to treat periodontitis demonstrated efficacy in reducing PD. Improvement was also observed in CAL and BOP.

Efficacy of scaling and root planning with periodontal endoscopy for residual pockets in the treatment of chronic periodontitis: a randomized controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

Residual pockets are a risk factor of periodontitis progression. This study evaluated the efficacy of periodontal endoscopy (PE) during scaling and root planning (SRP) of residual pockets in chronic periodontitis patients after initial periodontal treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A single-blinded, randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted in systemically healthy subjects presenting at least three residual pockets with a probing depth (PD) ≥ 5 mm in each quadrant. Subjects were randomly allocated to one of two trial groups using a computer-generated program: SRP + PE (test group) or SRP alone (control group). Clinical parameters (PD, clinical attachment level (CAL), bleeding on probing (BOP), and plaque index (PLI)) were then measured at baseline, 3-, and 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 1629 sites in 37 patients were examined. Both treatments significantly improved all clinical outcomes (PD, CAL, BOP, and PLI) from baseline to 6 months (P < 0.05), although greater reductions in PD and PLI were observed in the test group at both 3- (PD: 3.45 ± 0.56 vs. 4.14 ± 0.59 mm; PLI: 0.55 ± 0.23 vs. 0.73 ± 0.27) and 6-month follow-up (PD: 3.12 ± 0.63 vs. 4.0 ± 0.68 mm; PLI: 0.49 ± 0.21 vs. 0.72 ± 0.28, respectively; P = 0.001 for PD and P = 0.021 for PLI). No significant differences in CAL or BOP were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

SRP + PE resulted in significant reductions in PD and PLI compared to SRP alone in residual pockets with a PD ≥ 5 mm.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The findings highlight the benefits of SRP + PE, supporting use as an alternative strategy in nonsurgical periodontal treatment.

Non-Surgical Periodontal Therapy - Evidence and Opinion

Effective non-surgical periodontal therapy is fundamental to achieve and maintain periodontal health, particularly in individuals who are susceptible to periodontitis. This article aims to highlight current evidence and published guidance, together with personal insights and suggestions from the author's clinical experience to help with management of patients utilising this common treatment modality.