Er:YAG Laser Versus Systemic Metronidazole as an Adjunct to Nonsurgical Periodontal Therapy: A Clinical and Microbiological Study

Probiotic adjuvant treatment in combination with scaling and root planing in chronic periodontitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the impact of probiotic supplementation on treating chronic periodontal (CP) disease based on clinical and microbiological findings. Four databases were searched: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science databases. The references to relevant studies were also manually searched. Analyses were conducted using the Review Manager 5.2 software, while the quality of randomised controlled trials was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. In total, 19 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled results revealed that the adjuvant use of probiotics in the treatment of patients with periodontal disease was largely associated with good clinical efficacy. Resulting in statistically significant improvements in plaque index (P<0.05), periodontal probing depth (P<0.05), clinical attachment level (P<0.05), gingival index (P<0.05), bleeding on probing (P<0.05), deep probing depth (P<0.05), and levels of subgingival microbes (P<0.05) following probiotic supplementation. In summary, the results of this meta-analysis suggest that the administration of probiotics together with scaling and root planing can somewhat improve CP patient clinical outcomes and reduce levels of periodontal pathogens. However, more comprehensive experiments are needed to standardise probiotics and maximise their adjuvant therapy.

Erbium lasers in non-surgical periodontal therapy: an umbrella review and evidence gap map analysis

The literature on the efficacy of erbium lasers for nonsurgical periodontal therapy is inconsistent. The objective of the umbrella review was to collate the information available in the systematic reviews to provide a comprehensive synthesis of clinical and patient reported outcomes following the use of erbium lasers for non-surgical periodontal therapy. An electronic database search was carried out, and systematic reviews/meta-analyses which assessed the efficacy of erbium lasers as monotherapy or as an adjunct to scaling and root planing were included. The methodological quality and reporting quality of the included studies were assessed. 15 Systematic reviews/meta-analyses were obtained after title, abstract, and full text search. The meta-analyses data revealed a clinical attachment level gain, reduction in probing pocket depth at 1 and 3-month follow-up, and no additional benefit at ≥ 6-month follow-up in the erbium laser group. The evidence gap map revealed lack of clinical outcome data at > 6-month follow-up and dearth in studies assessing patient reported outcome measures and adverse events. Erbium lasers may provide short-term clinical benefits, and further studies with standardized laser parameters evaluating long-term follow-up, patient-reported outcome measures, and adverse events are needed.

The adjunctive effect of probiotics to nonsurgical treatment of chronic periodontitis: A randomized controlled clinical trial

Background:

Probiotics catch more attention as adjunctive periodontal therapy. This study was conducted to assess the benefit of locally delivered Lactobacillus reuteri (L. reuteri) probiotic as an adjunctive to scaling and root planing (SRP) in the treatment of chronic periodontitis clinically and microbiologically.

Materials and Methods:

Bacterial cultures and clinical evaluation were recorded in 20 sites of chronic periodontitis in 12 patients and followed up at 3 and 6 months from the start of intervention using clinical attachment level, probing pocket depth, plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing, and microbiologically for Porphyromonas gingivalis (P. gingivalis) load. Patients meeting the inclusion criteria were scheduled within 1 week for two sessions of SRP. After SRP, oral hygiene measures were reassured, and sites were divided randomly into two groups 10 sites each. Group I received SRP only, while Group II received SRP and subgingival delivery of 1 ml of probiotic L. reuteri suspension at baseline and 1, 2, and 4 weeks using a blunt syringe. A periodontal pack was applied after the placement of the drug.

Results:

We found noticeable variation between the two groups in all evaluation aspects at 3 and 6-month follow-up periods except PI at 6 months in which there was no significant difference between both groups.

Conclusions:

The results proved the antimicrobial benefit of L. reuteri probiotic as a promising adjunctive therapy in improving periodontal parameters. However, further long-term studies with large sample size are needed to evaluate the extent of the added value of L. reuteri suspension.

Metagenomic Assessment of Different Interventions for Treatment of Chronic Periodontitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background:

Chronic periodontitis is attributed to oral microbial imbalance and host inflammatory reaction.

Objective:

Our review addresses the question of: Are the available interventions able to regain oral microbial balance in patients having chronic periodontitis?

Data Sources:

We performed a comprehensive systematic search of MEDLine via Pubmed, Cochrane CENTRAL, Clinicalkey, Clarivate Analytics, Springer materials, Wiley, SAGE, Elsevier, Taylor & Francis group, and Wolter Kluwer, together with hand searching and searching the grey literature.

Eligibility Criteria:

We included interventional studies testing the microbiome analysis using metagenomic techniques as an outcome to any intervention for chronic periodontitis.

Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods:

All studies were imported in Mendeley. The risk of bias was assessed using the specific tool for each study design. The results were analysed using RevMan. All the review steps were performed in duplicates.

Results:

The search yielded 2700 records. After exclusion steps, 10 records were found eligible. We included 5 RCTs, 1 non-RCT, 3 before-and-after studies, and 1 ongoing study. The studies tested non-surgical periodontal treatment with and without antibiotic coverage, probiotics, sodium hypochlorite rinse, and different toothpaste ingredients. One RCT tested the use of enamel matrix derivatives in cases with furcation involvement.

Limitations:

The eligible available studies were small in number. Also, the risk of bias and lack of a standardized protocol impaired the ability to pool all the results.

Conclusions:

The body of the available evidence is not sufficient, and future studies are recommended to better evaluate the effect of periodontal treatments on the periodontal microbiome.

Clinical Effectiveness of Er: YAG Lasers Adjunct to Scaling and Root Planing in Non-Surgical Treatment of Chronic Periodontitis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND Er: YAG lasers (ERLs) show suitable characteristics for scaling and root planing, but previous studies have drawn conflicting conclusions. This meta-analysis aimed to systematically appraise the available evidence concerning the effectiveness of ERLs as an adjunct to scaling and root planing (SRP) for non-surgical periodontal treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ERLs+SRP with SRP alone for the treatment of chronic periodontitis were searched in 9 electronic biomedical databases up to January 2018. The weighted mean differences (WMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were counted for probing depth (PD) reduction, clinical attachment level (CAL) gain, and visual analog scale (VAS) score. Heterogeneity was evaluated with the I² statistic for interstudy comparisons and the χ²-based Q statistic for intra-study comparisons. Sensitivity analysis was conducted by switching to a random or fixed effect model based on the heterogeneity. Publication bias was measured by Begg's test. RESULTS Ten related RCTs met the inclusion criteria. There were statistically significant differences in the assessed clinical parameters at the three-month follow-up: PD reduction (WMD=0.32, 95%CI range from 0.14 to 0.51, p<0.001; p=0.003, I²=69.7%); CAL gain (WMD=0.31, 95%CI range from 0.22 to 0.40, p<0.001; p=0.209, I²=28.8%); and VAS scores (WMD=-1.38, 95%CI range from -2.45 to -0.31, p<0.001; p=0.182, I²=44%). There were no significant differences at the six- and twelve-month follow-ups. Sensitivity analysis revealed that the results were consistent. No evidence of publication bias was detected. CONCLUSIONS This systematic analysis demonstrated that ERLs+SRP provides additional short-term effectiveness and that patients experience less pain compared to SRP. There were no significant differences at the medium-term and long-term follow-ups. Long-term well-designed RCTs are required.

In Vitro-Activity of Er:YAG Laser in Comparison with other Treatment Modalities on Biofilm Ablation from Implant and Tooth Surfaces

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Bacterial biofilms play a major role in the etiology of periodontal and peri-implant diseases. The aim of the study was to evaluate the removal of bacterial biofilms and attachment of epithelial cells (EC), gingival fibroblasts (GF) and osteoblast-like cells (OC) to dentin and titanium surfaces after Er:YAG laser (Er:YAG) in comparison with other treatment methods.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Multi-species bacterial biofilms were grown on standardized dentin and titanium specimens with a sand-blasted and acid etched (SLA) surface for 3.5 d. Thereafter, the specimens were placed into artificially-created pockets. The following methods for biofilm removal were used: 1) Gracey (dentin) or titanium curettes (CUR), 2) Er:YAG, 3) photodynamic therapy (PDT) and 4) CUR with adjunctive PDT (CUR/PDT). Colony forming units (CFUs) of the remaining biofilms and attachment of EC, GF and OC were determined. Statistical analysis was performed by means of ANOVA with post-hoc LSD.

RESULTS

All treatment methods decreased statistically significantly (p<0.001) total CFUs in biofilms compared with untreated dentin and titanium surfaces respectively. On dentin, Er:YAG was equally efficient as CUR and PDT but inferior to CUR/PDT (p = 0.005). On titanium, surfaces, the use of Er:YAG resulted in statistically significantly superior biofilm removal compared to the 3 other treatments (each p<0.001). Counts of attached EC, GF and OC were the lowest on untreated contaminated dentin and titanium surfaces each. After CUR/PDT higher EC counts were found on dentin (p = 0.006). On titanium, all decontamination methods statistically significantly increased (p<0.001) the counts of attached EC without differences between groups. Statistically significantly higher counts of GF (p = 0.024) and OC (p<0.001) were observed after Er:YAG decontamination compared with untreated surfaces.

CONCLUSION

Ablation of subgingival biofilms and in particular decontamination of titanium implant surfaces with an Er:YAG laser seem to be a promising approach and warrants further investigations.

Microbiological effects and recolonization patterns after adjunctive subgingival debridement with Er:YAG laser

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to assess the microbiological effects and recolonization patterns after non-surgical periodontal treatment protocol based on the adjunctive use of erbium-doped yttrium aluminium garnet (Er:YAG) laser.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients diagnosed with chronic periodontitis were randomly assigned to two different treatment protocols: test, full-mouth subgingival ultrasonic instrumentation followed by Er-YAG laser application 1 week later to sites with initial probing pocket depth ≥4.5 mm; and control, full-mouth ultrasonic subgingival instrumentation within 1 week. Clinical (at sampled sites) and microbiological (culture-based) parameters were recorded at baseline and 3 and 12 months. Microbiological variables included total counts, frequency of detection, proportions and counts of target species.

RESULTS

Results from 19 test and 21 control patients were compared. Minor changes were observed for total colony-forming units, with no differences between groups. For the frequency of detection, a limited and similar impact in both groups was observed for the most prevalent (over 80 %) periodontal pathogens (Porphyromonas gingivalis, Prevotella intermedia, Fusobacterium nucleatum). For proportions, reductions in P. gingivalis occurred at 3 months, both in the test and control groups (from 16.3 to 10 % and 16 to 14.8 %, respectively), although these differences were not statistically significant. At 12 months, the test group showed a statistically significant greater reduction in probing depth for the sampled sites.

CONCLUSIONS

The adjunctive use of Er:YAG laser when compared with conventional ultrasonic debridement did not provide a microbiological added benefit.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Even though some clinical benefits with the adjunctive laser application were identified when comparing both treatment protocols, there were no differences in microbiological outcomes or in the bacterial recolonization patterns.

Efficacy of adjunctive laser in non-surgical periodontal treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To evaluate the efficacy of the adjunctive laser therapy in conventional non-surgical treatment of chronic periodontitis, an electronic search was performed through the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and China Biology Medicine (CBM) Disc, for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs. All the 12 included studies (11 RCTs and 1 quasi-RCT) were qualified for descriptive and quantitative analysis. Outcomes were divided into two groups according to the length of follow-ups (long term and short term). Subgroup analyses were performed based on the mode of laser (inside and outside mode). Among all included researches, reduction in probing depth (PD) and gain in clinical attachment level (CAL) were presented with the mean value and 95 % confidence interval, while bleeding on probing (BOP) was assessed descriptively. Meta-analysis suggested that adjunctive laser therapy reduced PD at 3 months [mean difference (MD) = -0.26, 95 % confidence interval (CI) range = -0.43 to -0.09, p = 0.003] but did not demonstrate significant effect on the CAL at either 3 months (MD = -0.03, 95 % CI range = -0.25 to 0.19, p = 0.79) or 6 months (MD = -0.11, 95 % CI range = -0.38 to 0.16, p = 0.43). Subgroup analyses indicated that laser therapy would be more effective when the probes were set up outside the periodontal pockets.

Microbiologic Observations After Four Treatment Strategies Among Patients With Periodontitis Maintaining a High Standard of Oral Hygiene: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

The benefit of full-mouth disinfection (FDIS) over traditional scaling and root planing (SRP), with or without adjunctive metronidazole, when treating chronic destructive periodontitis remains equivocal, as does the long-term association between clinical and microbiologic outcomes after such strategies. The aim of this study is to examine the relationship between clinical and microbiologic outcomes of four different treatment strategies for chronic destructive periodontitis among patients who maintain excellent oral hygiene and low gingival bleeding scores.

METHODS

One hundred eighty-four patients with periodontitis and capable of maintaining a high standard of oral hygiene were randomly allocated to one of four treatment groups: 1) FDIS + metronidazole; 2) FDIS + placebo; 3) SRP + metronidazole; and 4) SRP + placebo. Recordings of plaque, bleeding on probing, probing depth (PD), and clinical attachment level were carried out in four sites per tooth at baseline, 3 and 12 months after treatment. Before treatment, pooled subgingival samples were obtained from the five deepest pockets, which were sampled again 3 and 12 months after treatment. Microbiologic assessments of eight putative periodontal pathogens were performed using the checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridization method.

RESULTS

Levels of bacterial species were already relatively low at baseline. The only microbial factor statistically significantly associated with the clinical outcomes of treatment after 12 months was the association between reductions of Tannerella forsythia and being free from PD ≥5 mm.

CONCLUSION

In this clinical trial, the only microbial factor associated with the clinical outcomes after 12 months was a statistically significant association between the reductions of T. forsythia and being free from PD ≥5 mm.

Er:YAG laser versus scaling and root planing as alternative or adjuvant for chronic periodontitis treatment: a systematic review

AIM

To perform a systematic review to evaluate the erbium-doped: yttrium, aluminium and garnet (Er:YAG) laser versus scaling and root planing (SRP) as alternative or adjuvant for chronic periodontitis treatment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We performed a literature search using six electronic databases and completed by manual searches up to July 2013. We conducted a meta-analysis as well as heterogeneity, sensitivity, subgroup and power analyses to clarify and validate the pooled results. The 3-, 6- and 12-month clinical outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

Twelve eligible randomized clinical trials were finally included. Our meta-analysis showed that Er:YAG laser resulted in similar clinical improvements as SRP 3 months postoperatively. For subgroups by laser level, quality of trials and fluorescence feedback device, the results remained consistent. The 6- and 12-month observations between Er:YaG laser and SRP demonstrated no difference but inconclusive, due to large heterogeneity. The advantage of Er:YAG laser adjuvant to SRP for periodontitis treatment was not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review indicated that the clinical efficacy of Er:YAG laser was similar to SRP 3 months postoperatively. The clinical benefits of Er:YAG laser as adjuvant to SRP was still lacking. Since Er:YAG laser has certain advantages, it could be expected to be a novel short-term alternative choice for chronic periodontitis.

Effects of root surface debridement using Er:YAG laser versus ultrasonic scaling - a SEM study

OBJECTIVE

Despite promising results of Er:YAG laser in periodontal debridement, to date there is no consensus about the ideal settings for clinical use. This experimental clinical trial aimed to determine the effects of debridement using Er:YAG laser and to compare with ultrasonic treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty-four teeth were divided into two in vivo and in vitro subgroups. Each tooth received ultrasonic treatment on one side and Er:YAG laser debridement at either 60, 100, 160 or 250 mJ pulse(-1) and at 10 Hz on the other side on a random basis. All samples were morphologically analyzed afterwards under scanning electron microscope for surface changes and dentinal tubules exposure. Treatment duration (d) was also recorded.

RESULTS

Laser debridement produced an irregular, rough and flaky surface free of carbonization or meltdown while ultrasound produced a relatively smoother surface. The number of exposed dentinal tubules (n) followed an energy-dependent trend. The number of exposed tubules among the in vivo laser groups was n 60 mJ = n 100 mJ < n 160 mJ < n 250 mJ (P < 0.001). Also 160 and 250 mJ lasers led to significantly more dentinal exposure than ultrasound under in vivo condition. Within the in vitro laser groups, dentinal tubules exposure was n 60 mJ < n 100 mJ < n 160 mJ < n 250 mJ (P ≤ 0.0015). Furthermore, in vitro laser treatments at 100, 160 and 250 mJ led to significantly more dentinal denudation than ultrasound. Treatment duration (d) for the in vivo groups was d 60 mJ > d 100 mJ > d Ultrasound = d 160 mJ > d 250 mJ (P ≤ 0.046), while for the in vitro groups it was d 60 mJ > d 100 mJ = d Ultrasound = d 160 mJ >d 250 mJ (P ≤ 0.046).

CONCLUSIONS

Due to excessive treatment duration and surface damage, Er:YAG laser debridement at 60 and 250 mJ pulse(-1), respectively, is not appropriate for clinical use. Although laser debridement at 100 and 160 mJ pulse(-1) seems more suitable for clinical application, compared to ultrasound the former is more time-consuming and the latter is more aggressive. Using a feedback device or lower pulse energies are recommended when using laser in closed field.