Clinical evaluation of the speed and effectiveness of subgingival calculus removal on single-rooted teeth with diamond-coated ultrasonic tips

Complications and treatment errors in nonsurgical periodontal therapy

Nonsurgical periodontal therapy can be subject to iatrogenesis, which includes all the complications directly or indirectly related to a treatment. These complications include both operator-dependent harms and errors and the consequences and adverse effects of the therapeutic procedures. The complications arising following nonsurgical periodontal treatment can be categorized as intraoperative and postoperative and can affect both soft and hard tissues at an intra-oral and extraoral level. Soft-tissues damage or damage to teeth and restorations can occur while performing the procedure. In the majority of cases, the risk of bleeding associated with nonsurgical therapy is reported to be low and easily controlled by means of local hemostatic measures, even in medicated subjects. Cervicofacial subcutaneous emphysema is not a frequent extraoral intraoperative complication, occurring during the use of air polishing. Moreover, side effects such as pain, fever, and dentine hypersensitivity are frequently reported as a consequence of nonsurgical periodontal therapy and can have a major impact on a patient's perception of the treatment provided. The level of intraoperative pain could be influenced by the types of instruments employed, the characteristics of tips, and the individual level of tolerance of the patient. Unexpected damage to teeth or restorations can also occur as a consequence of procedural errors.

Periodontal instrumentation technique: an exploratory analysis of clinical outcomes and financial aspects

Objective This exploratory post hoc analysis sought to investigate clinical outcomes comparing non-surgical treatment for periodontal disease using exclusively hand instruments, exclusively ultrasonic instruments or a combination approach. Differences in time efficiency and equipment use with each treatment method were evaluated.Methods In total, 55 patients with periodontitis were treated across two studies (randomised controlled trial and cohort study) with non-surgical periodontal therapy using hand instruments (HI), ultrasonic instruments (UI) or a combination approach (CI). All patients were re-evaluated 90 days after treatment. Clinical parameters, time taken and financial implications of non-surgical periodontal therapy were explored with a descriptive analysis within this post hoc analysis.Results There were no clinically relevant differences in clinical parameters across all groups at day 90. Inter-group comparisons showed no clinically relevant differences in treatment outcome between groups. UI required less time on average to complete treatment compared to HI. UI provided using a half mouth approach had fewest overall episodes of expenditure and lowest maintenance costs.Conclusions Comparison of clinical outcomes between HI, UI and CI yielded no clinically relevant differences. When comparing HI and UI, UI had a shorter treatment time on average. Full mouth treatment was associated with the least patient visits. UI was least costly on a recurring basis.

A comparative questionnaire study of patient complaint levels between magnetostrictive ultrasonic scaler (Cavitron® ) and piezoelectric ultrasonic scalers

OBJECTIVES

Ultrasonic scalers often cause an uncomfortable feeling to patients during the procedure. This study was conducted to compare patient complaint levels between magnetostrictive (M-USSC) and piezoelectric ultrasonic scalers (P-USSC) during supragingival scaling.

METHODS

This study enrolled 82 subjects who received supportive periodontal therapy for at least 2 years. At each recall visit, probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP) and O'Leary plaque control record (O'PCR) were recorded. Then, supragingival scaling was performed using P-USSC (Varios or Petit Piezo) at the first visit and M-USSC (Cavitron) at the second visit. After each treatment, a questionnaire survey was performed using the Wong-Baker Faces Pain Scale for six items, which included the typical complaints occurring during ultrasonic scaling.

RESULTS

The scores for all the six items related to patient complaints were greater for P-USSC than for M-USSC (p < 0.001). Patient complaints such as discomfort, pain, sound, vibration, hyperesthesia and length of treatment time were ameliorated in 74%, 65%, 80%, 67%, 57% and 53% of subjects using M-USSC, respectively. On the other hand, only <5% of subjects showed deterioration in terms of each complaint.

CONCLUSION

This study suggested that M-USSC causes fewer patient complaints during supragingival scaling than P-USSC. M-USSC may improve patient motivation and compliance and may contribute towards achieving successful treatment outcomes. However, this result could differ depending on the shape of the tip and the insert and treatment site. Further research will be required under various conditions.

The systemic inflammatory response following hand instrumentation versus ultrasonic instrumentation-A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to investigate whether the immediate systemic inflammatory response following full-mouth debridement differs following use of hand compared with ultrasonic instruments.

METHODS

Thirty-nine periodontitis patients were randomized to treatment with full-mouth debridement using either hand or ultrasonic instrumentation completed within 24 hr. Serum and periodontal clinical parameters were collected at baseline, day 1, day 7 and day 90 post-treatment. Differences in systemic inflammatory markers were assessed using general linear models at each timepoint, corrected for age, gender, smoking status, body mass index and baseline levels of each marker.

RESULTS

Across all patients, serum C-reactive protein increased at day 1, with no differences between hand and ultrasonic groups (p(adjusted) = .22). There was no difference between groups in interleukin-6 (p(adjusted) = .29) or tumour necrosis factor α (p(adjusted) = .53) at day 1. Inflammatory markers returned to baseline levels by day 7. Treatment resulted in equal and marked improvements in clinical parameters in both groups; however, total treatment time was on average shorter for ultrasonic instruments (p(adjusted) = .002).

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrasonic instrumentation resulted in shorter treatment time with comparable clinical outcomes. Levels of serum C-reactive protein at day 1 were similar following debridement with hand or ultrasonic instruments.

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.

Evaluation of calculus imaging on root surfaces by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the ability of optical coherence tomography (OCT) to display calculus on root surfaces.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Ten teeth with calculus on the root surface were embedded in resin, omitting the root surface. A region of interest (ROI) was marked by small drill holes coronally and apically of the calculus and imaged by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography ([SD OCT], Telesto SP5, centre wavelength 1310 nm) and light microscopy (LM). To evaluate the impact of different fluids on calculus visualisation, using OCT, root surfaces were covered by a layer of NaCl and blood and displayed by OCT. Subsequently, teeth were completely covered with resin and sectioned for histological evaluation. Within the ROI, lengths of root surface and calculus were measured by LM and OCT, and the ratio [%] was calculated. In addition, at three sites of each ROI, agreement of presence and length of calculus was evaluated. Both methods were compared using Pearson's correlation.

RESULTS

Regarding the presence of calculus, agreement between LM and OCT was strong (κ_i = 0.783, p = 0.033), and measurements regarding the length of the calculus were strongly correlated (r_i >0.906; p_i <0.001). However, the values differed for dry (p = 0.023) and NaCl-covered root surfaces (p = 0.035).

CONCLUSION

Calculus on the root surface can be displayed by SD-OCT, which therefore may be suited as imaging technology for subgingival calculus in periodontal pockets.

Evaluation of the Effects of Er,Cr:YSGG Laser, Ultrasonic Scaler and Curette on Root Surface Profile Using Surface Analyser and Scanning Electron Microscope: An In Vitro Study

Introduction: The periodontal therapy is primarily targeted at removal of dental plaque and plaque retentive factors. Although the thorough removal of adherent plaque, calculus and infected root cementum is desirable, it is not always achieved by conventional modalities. To accomplish more efficient results several alternative devices have been used. Lasers are one of the most promising modalities for nonsurgical periodontal treatment as they can achieve excellent tissue ablation with strong bactericidal and detoxification effects. Methods: Thirty freshly extracted premolars were selected and decoronated. The mesial surface of each root was divided vertically into four approximately equal parts. These were distributed into four group based on the root surface treatment. Part A (n = 30) was taken as control and no instrumentation was performed. Part B (n = 30) was irradiated by Erbium, Chromium doped Yttrium Scandium Gallium Garnet (Er,Cr:YSGG) laser. Part C (n = 30) was treated by piezoelectric ultrasonic scaler. Part D (n = 30) was treated by Gracey curette. The surface roughness was quantitatively analyzed by profilometer using roughness average (Ra) value, while presence of smear layer, cracks, craters and melting of surface were analyzed using scanning electron microscope (SEM). The means across the groups were statistically compared with control using Dunnett test. Results: Among the test groups, Er,Cr:YSGG laser group showed maximum surface roughness (mean Ra value of 4.14 μm) as compared to ultrasonic scaler (1.727 μm) and curette group (1.22 μm). However, surface with smear layer were found to be maximum (50%) in curette treated samples and minimum (20%) in laser treated ones. Maximum cracks (83.34%) were produced by ultrasonic scaler, and minimum (43.33%) by curettes. Crater formation was maximum (50%) in laser treated samples and minimum (3.33%) in curette treated ones. 63.33% samples treated by laser demonstrated melting of root surface, followed by ultrasonic scaler and curettes. Conclusion: Er,Cr:YSGG laser produced maximum microstructural changes on root surface that can influence the attachment of soft periodontal tissues as well as plaque and calculus deposition. In vivo studies are needed to validate these results and to evaluate their clinical effects.

Effect of the lasers used in periodontal therapy on the surfaces of restorative materials

The present study aimed to reveal potential damage of the lasers, which are used as an alternative to manual instruments in periodontal therapy, might cause to the surface of restorative materials. Four different restorative materials were used: a glass-ionomer cement (GIC), a flowable composite (FC), a universal composite (UC) and an amalgam. Ten cylindrical samples (8 mm × 2 mm) were prepared for each restorative material. Two laser systems were used in subgingival curettage mode; an 940 nm diode laser (Epic Biolase, Irvine, CA) and an Er,Cr:YSGG laser (Waterlase iPlus, Biolase, Irvine, CA). After laser irradiation, roughness of the sample surfaces was measured using a profilometer. Additionally, atomic force microscopy (AFM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) analyses were performed to evaluate the morphology and surface deformations of the restorative materials and surfaces. The laser irradiation did not affect the surface roughness of any restorative materials relative to that of the control group (p > 0.05) except for the Er,Cr:YSGG treatment on GIC (p < 0.05). SEM and AFM images verified the results of the surface roughness tests. Within the limitations of the present study, it was demonstrated that Er,Cr:YSGG and diode lasers, aside from the Er;Cr:YSGG treatment on GIC, caused no harmful surface effects on adjacent restorative materials. SCANNING 38:227-233, 2016. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Trauma from instrumentation after non-surgical periodontal treatment with ultrasonic scalers and Nd:YAG laser

OBJECTIVE

Periodontal therapies aimed at altering the progression of periodontal diseases must include meticulous mechanical debridement during both the non-surgical and the surgical phases of periodontal treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the immediate effect of trauma from instrumentation on clinical attachment level after non-surgical periodontal treatment with ultrasonic scalers and a Nd:YAG laser.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-four patients with untreated chronic periodontitis, presenting probing depths of 4-6 mm on anterior teeth, upper and lower, were entered into the study. The selected teeth were probed with a pressure-controlled probe, guided by stents. Each quadrant was randomly allocated in a split-mouth design either to treatment with Nd:YAG laser using an energy of 1W, 100mj, 1064nm (test group) or to periodontal treatment using ultrasonic scalers (control group). Clinical parameters, including plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BOP), probing pocket depth (PPD) and probing attachment level (PAL) were acquired prior to and immediately after treatment.

RESULTS

Statistical analysis demonstrated no differences between groups at baseline for all parameters (p > 0.05). Immediately after treatment, the control group showed a greater PAL loss than the test group (p < 0.05). For the control group, there were statistically significant differences between PAL immediately before and after treatment (p < 0.05), but not test group (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limits of the present study, it may be concluded that non-surgical periodontal treatment with ultrasonic scalers causes a mean immediate attachment loss of 0.68 mm and that a Nd:YAG laser seems to reduce significantly the trauma the instrumentation produced.

The effect of various ultrasonic and hand instruments on the root surfaces of human single rooted teeth: A Planimetric and Profilometric study

Background:

The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of different ultrasonic scalers and a periodontal curette on the root surfaces for calculus removal and root surface roughness.

Materials and Methods:

40 single rooted teeth with subgingival calculus destined for extraction were assigned to one of three experimental groups (n = 10, in each group) and one control group (untreated, n = 10). Experimental groups were: Group 1: Piezoelectric ultrasonic group; Group 2: Magnetostrictive ultrasonic group; Group 3: Hand instrumentation group (Curette). After instrumentation, the teeth were extracted and the presence of residual deposits and root surface roughness were analyzed using Planimetric analyzing tool (Tool that measures the area of a plane figure as a mechanically coupled pointer traversing the perimeter of figure) and Surface Profilometer (Instrument used for profiling of an object). Root surface characteristics were evaluated qualitatively using SEM. Standardization of force, angulations and adaptation of instrument couldn’t be achieved in our study due to in vivo study design rather than in vitro design in previous studies where procedure was done on the extracted teeth samples.

Results:

The results of the study showed that residual deposits were similar in all experimental groups. With respect to roughness parameters, Rq (Root mean square roughness) and Rt (Total roughness) a significant difference was observed (P < 0.001) among hand instrumentation and ultrasonic devices. SEM analysis revealed a similar root surface pattern for the ultrasonic devices, but curette showed many instrument scratches, gouges, and removal of large amount of cementum.

Conclusions:

Curette produced the rougher root surfaces than two ultrasonic devices used in the study and caused more root surface removal. Piezoelectric devices produced minimum root surface roughness but caused more root substance removal and more cracks than Magnetostrictive ultrasonic devices.

KTP laser therapy as an adjunctive to scaling and root planing in treatment of chronic periodontitis

OBJECTIVE

The main goal of periodontal treatment is to control infection and, thereby, curb disease progression. Recent studies have suggested that the use of a laser as an adjunct to scaling and root planing (SRP) might improve the effectiveness of conventional periodontal treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the clinical effects of potassium-titanyl-phosphate (KTP) laser therapy in the treatment of chronic periodontitis in combination with traditional SRP.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-four patients with untreated chronic periodontitis were treated using a split-mouth study design in which each side was randomly treated by SRP alone (control group) or KTP laser (0.8W, time on 50 ms, time off 50 ms, 30 s, 532 nm) followed by SRP (test group). In the distribution of the teeth (total = 124 teeth) in the patients, 106 (86%) were molars and 18 (14%) were premolars. The selected teeth were probed with a pressure-controlled probe, guided by stents. Clinical periodontal parameters including plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BOP), probing pocket depth (PPD) and probing attachment level (PAL) were recorded at baseline and at 2 and 12 months following therapy.

RESULTS

Statistical analysis demonstrated no differences between groups at baseline for all parameters (p > 0.05). BOP and PPD reductions and PAL gains were statistically significant both between baseline and 2 months and between baseline and 12 months in both groups (p < 0.05). The test group showed a greater reduction in PPD compared to the control group (p < 0.05). In addition, the test group showed a greater probing attachment gain compared to the control group (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with chronic periodontitis, clinical outcomes of conventional periodontal treatment can be improved by using an adjunctive KTP laser.

Effects of Mechanical versus Manual Non Surgical Periodontal Therapy on Patient Comfort and Periodontal Healing: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Few studies have focused on the problem of pain and discomfort experienced during and after periodontal debridment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of manual versus hand driven non surgical periodontal instrumentation on the patient's comfort, perception of pain and dental hypersensitivity during and after the instrumentation. Moreover, the influence of the treatment modality on the healing of slight to moderate periodontitis was assessed with careful attention to indices of periodontal inflammation. 22 subjects with a minimum of 4≥6mm periodontal pockets with 3 to 4mm attachment loss in different quadrants, the presence of ≥20 teeth with a minimum of four molars were enrolled. PD (probing depth, 6 sites per tooth), number of sites with PD> 6mm, buccal and lingual recessions were collected. Two quadrants Mouth Bleeding and Plaque Scores (T.M.P.S, T.M.B.S.) were assessed as the presence or absence of bleeding on probing and plaque following disclosing in quadrants 1–4 and 2–3. Non surgical periodontal treatment was delivered in two appointments performed within one week. In the first appointment the first and the fourth quadrants (patient's right side) were completely treated by mechanical or manual devices according to the randomization codes. In the second appointment the remaining two quadrants (patient's left side) were instrumented with the other therapeutical approach. The duration of each session, need for local anesthesia and additional information were recorded during the instrumentation appointments. All the patients were requested to fill in a form regarding pain, hypersensitivity, and need for painkillers following the two debridment appointments. Two drop outs were observed. Mean pain scores after treatment were higher in manual than in machine driven side (3.11±1.40 vs 2.33±1.41), whereas mean dentine hypersensitivity scores were slightly higher in mechanical side (4.40±1.56 vs 3.77±1.11). The need for painkillers after both treatment approaches was minimal. 6 out of 20 patients asked for local anesthesia and clustering regarding the request for both treated sides was observed. The mean instrumentation time was significantly lower for mechanical versus manual instrumentation (84.57±12.92 vs 119.25±13.50, p<0.001). Periodontal healing was similar in both the hand and machine driven instrumented sides. TMPS and TMBS were significantly lower at baseline compared to re-evaluation visits and the within group changes were significant lower at re-evaluation. Most of patients well tolerated non surgical periodontal treatment despite the type of instruments that are chosen by the clinician. Pain is infrequently reported and is more common after manual instrumentation compared to machine driven one. The need for local anesthesia is quite uncommon and is surely subject-dependent. Temporary, slight dentine hypersensitivity is a common adverse effect reported by most of patients after subgingival debridment. Machine driven debridment shows a dramatic advantage compared to manual treatment due to the lower amount of time needed to complete the instrumentation.

Effect of absorbent tetracycline-loaded membrane used in the reduction of periodontal pockets: an in vivo study

This clinical study evaluated the influence of scaling and root planning (SRP), with and without the use of tetracycline-loaded bovine absorbent membrane, in the reduction of periodontal pockets according to 3 parameters: probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP) and plaque index (PI). Twenty-four patients were selected totalizing 144 random teeth divided in 2 groups (n=72 teeth) - control (SRP) and experimental (SRP with tetracycline-loaded absorbent membrane). PPD, BOP and PI were determined before and 28 days after the treatment. In all patients, the PPD values at the end of the treatment were always lower than the baseline values. There was a reduction of the PI for both treatments, but it was more evident on the experimental group. In conclusion, the use of tetracycline-loaded absorbent membrane could result in a better prognosis compared to scaling and root planning after only 28 days of evaluation.

Subgingival debridement efficacy of glycine powder air polishing

BACKGROUND

Glycine powder air polishing (GPAP) has been shown to be significantly more effective in reducing the subgingival cultivable microflora in shallow periodontal pockets compared to curets and is safe when applied directly to root surfaces. The purpose of this study was to assess the subgingival debridement efficacy of GPAP in periodontal pockets with various depths.

METHODS

In each of 60 patients with severe periodontitis, one tooth with a probing depth (PD) > or =6 mm was randomly assigned to one of the following interventions: GPAP performed in teeth instrumented 3 months earlier (I); GPAP performed in previously non-instrumented teeth (NI); or no treatment (control). GPAP was performed for 5 seconds per surface. After extraction, teeth were stained with 0.5% toluidine blue, and subgingival debridement efficacy was assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, median debridement depth was 2.00 mm in I teeth and 1.86 mm in NI teeth, and the median debrided root surface was 49.24% and 45.64%, respectively. In anatomic PDs (APDs) of 2 to 3 mm, relative debridement depth (debridement depth/APD) ranged from 65% to 80% and 60% to 75% in I and NI teeth, respectively; the corresponding values for debrided root surface were 60% to 70% and 50% to 60%. In control teeth, virtually all subgingival root surfaces were stained. Clinical PD measurements were a median of 1.05 mm deeper than APD.

CONCLUSION

GPAP for 5 seconds per surface is effective in removing most of the subgingival biofilm in periodontal pockets with an APD < or =3 mm.

Periodontal healing after non-surgical therapy with a new ultrasonic device: a randomized controlled clinical trial

AIM

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and microbiological healing outcomes following non-surgical periodontal therapy using the new Vector ultrasonic system versus scaling and root planing (S/RP) with Gracey curettes.

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 the lower jaws each. Clinical and microbiological parameters were assessed at baseline, 4 weeks, and 6 months after treatment. Furthermore, post-operative hypersensitivity was assessed. The Wilcoxon signed rank test (alpha=0.05) was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Both therapies provided statistically significant clinical and microbiological improvements of periodontal conditions 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, no other clinical and microbiological parameters revealed significant differences between the sites treated with the Vector system or S/RP.

CONCLUSION

Both the Vector system and S/RP provided favourable periodontal healing results, although in deep pockets S/RP appeared to achieve a better resolution of inflammation.

Sonic and ultrasonic scalers in periodontal treatment: a review

Periodontal therapy aims at arresting periodontal infection and maintaining a healthy periodontium. The periodic mechanical removal of subgingival microbial biofilms is essential for controlling inflammatory periodontal disease. Mechanical periodontal therapy consists of scaling, root planing and gingival curettage. The sonic and ultrasonic scalers are valuable tools in the prevention of periodontal disease. The vibration of scaler tips is the main effect to remove the deposits from the dental surface, such as bacterial plaque, calculus and endotoxin. However, constant flushing activity of the lavage used to cool the tips and cavitational activity result in disruption of the weak and unattached subgingival plaque. The aim of the study was to review the safety, efficacy, role and deleterious side-effects of sonic and ultrasonic scalers in mechanical periodontal therapy.

Evaluation of selective calculus removal by a fluorescence feedback-controlled Er:YAG laser in vitro

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the removal of subgingival calculus and dental hard tissues depending on the threshold level of a fluorescence feedback-controlled Er:YAG laser.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twenty teeth with calculus on the root surface were treated with an Er:YAG laser. Laser settings were 140 mJ and 10 Hz. The initial fluorescence threshold level of 5 [U] was reduced at intervals of 1 [U] for every laser treatment. Areas of residual calculus (RC) were evaluated using a surface analysis software. Loss of dental hard tissues was assessed by histomorphometric analysis of undecalcified ground sections.

RESULTS

Using a threshold value of 5 [U], the median amount of RC was 11% (0-78%). By lowering the threshold levels, the amount of RC decreased [level 1 [U]: 0% (0-26%)]. The laser-treated root surfaces revealed a statistically significant reduction of the cementum thickness [median: 80 microm (0-250)] compared with the non-treated opposite side [median: 90 microm (30-250)] (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

The amount of RC following laser irradiation depends on the fluorescence threshold level for a feedback-controlled Er:YAG laser. It might be suggested that this laser system may be used with a threshold level even lower than 5 [U] without removing a clinically relevant amount of root cementum.

Calculus Removal With Diamond-Coated Ultrasonic Inserts In Vitro

BACKGROUND

Efficient calculus removal is a primary goal in periodontal therapy. Diamond-coated ultrasonic inserts (DIs) offer promise for improved scaling and were evaluated in vitro.

METHODS

Extracted human teeth with moderate to severe calculus had areas of calculus ( approximately 5 x 5 mm) delineated with small burs. Each calculus area was treated under 2.5x magnification to the point of visible root cleanliness with sharp Gracey curets (hand instruments [HIs]), plain ultrasonic inserts (PIs), or ultrasonic inserts with fine-grit diamond coating; the latter two were used in a magnetostrictive ultrasonic instrument at a medium power setting. Each curet or insert was used for four teeth and then replaced by a new instrument. The time needed to clean each tooth/surface was recorded. The total area treated and the area of the residual calculus were calculated using an imaging analysis program.

RESULTS

The mean time required for clinical calculus removal was 29.7 seconds for DIs, 91.9 seconds for PIs, and 49.8 seconds for HIs (all P <0.0001 from each other). Overall, the mean percentage of residual calculus was 6.3% for DIs, 5.4% for PIs, and 3.1% for HIs (significant differences between HIs and the other treatments).

CONCLUSIONS

In vitro calculus removal was faster with DIs, followed by HIs and PIs. More residual calculus was found with the DIs; however, the 1% to 3% difference (93.7% clean versus 94.6% clean versus 96.9% clean with DIs, PIs, and HIs, respectively) does not seem to be clinically significant.

A comparative SEM study between hand instrument and Er:YAG laser scaling and root planing

Scaling and root planing are one of the most commonly used procedures for the treatment of periodontal diseases. Removal of calculus using conventional hand instruments is incomplete and rather time-consuming. In search for more efficient and less difficult instrumentation, investigators have proposed lasers as alternatives or adjuncts for scaling and root planing. The aim of the present study was to compare the effectiveness of subgingival scaling and root planing with erbium: yttrium, aluminium, garnet (Er:YAG) laser and hand instrumentation in vitro. The mesial and distal surfaces of 15 periodontal loosed extracted teeth were treated randomly either by hand instrumentation or by Er:YAG laser irradiation. After choosing the "very long pulse mode" (pulse duration of about 700 micros), the output energy of 160 mJ with 920-microm beam diameter (RO7 Perio tip, Fidelis, Fotona, Slovenia) and frequency of 12 Hz were selected, both according to the best results of past studies. In addition, air water spray was used during the procedures. The morphology of the root surface was evaluated by three observers with a scanning electron microscopy in magnifications of 50x and 400x. The result of this setting showed that the rate of remained roughness on treated root surfaces in two groups of hand instruments and Er:YAG laser had a meaningful difference: The surface roughness in Er:YAG laser group was more than in hand instruments group. The present study could demonstrate the in vitro capability of the Er:YAG laser for scaling and root planing in periodontitis, although the effectiveness of this setting did not reach that achieved by hand instrumentation. It could be concluded that lower frequency and long pulse duration maybe more suitable for the micro-morphology of root surface after treatment. This theory is going to be tested with the same laser instrument in the next study.

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.

Efficiency of the VectorTM-system compared with conventional subgingival debridement in vitro and in vivo

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy of the novel ultrasonic Vector -system system for subgingival debridement and to compare the results with conventional periodontal instrumentation in vitro and in vivo.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Forty extracted human teeth were treated in vitro: Vector -system with polishing (VP) and abrasive fluid (VA), conventional ultrasonic system (U) and hand instrument (H). At intervals of 40 s, calculus removal was assessed using a 3D laser scanning device. Eight single-rooted teeth were treated in vivo with the Vector -system or hand instruments. Subgingival plaque samples were obtained for microbiological evaluation. After extraction, residual calculus was assessed by means of digitized planimetry.

RESULTS

In vitro efficiency of hand instruments was statistically higher compared with the conventional ultrasonic system (p < 0.05) and the Vector -system with no difference between U and VA (p > 0.05) and VA and VP (p > 0.05). Residual calculus following in vivo instrumentation was not different in the Vector and the hand instrument group (p > 0.05) but treatment time with the Vector -system was statistically higher (p < 0.05). A similar reduction of periopathogenic bacteria could be observed in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Using the Vector -system, root surfaces can be debrided as thoroughly as with conventional instruments. However, treatment is more time consuming than conventional debridement.

Root surface removal and resultant surface texture with diamond-coated ultrasonic inserts: an in vitro and SEM study

BACKGROUND

A new diamond-coated ultrasonic insert has been developed for scaling and root planing, and it was evaluated in vitro for the amount of root surface removed and the roughness of the residual root surface as a result of instrumentation.

METHODS

48 extracted single-rooted human teeth were ground flat on one root surface and mounted (flat side up) in PVC rings of standard height and diameter with improved dental stone. Each tooth surface was treated with either a plain ultrasonic insert (PI), an ultrasonic insert with a fine grit diamond coating (DI) or sharp Gracey curettes (HI). The mounted teeth were attached to a stepper motor which drove the teeth in a horizontal, reciprocal motion at a constant rate. The thickness from the flattened bottom of the ring to the flattened tooth surface was measured before and after 10, 20, and 30 instrumentation strokes for each root surface with each of the experimental instruments. A number of treated teeth were randomly selected for examination with SEM and a profilometer. Statistical analysis (analysis of co-variance) was performed to compare the amounts of tooth structure removed among the 3 instruments and t-test was used to compare the roughness of the treated root surfaces.

RESULTS

The mean depth of root structure removed was PI 10.7 microm, HI 15.0 microm, and DI 46.2 microm after 10 strokes; and PI 21.6 microm, HI 33.2 and DI 142.0 microm after 30 strokes, respectively. On average, 0.9 microm, 1.3 microm, and 4.7 microm of root surface was removed with each stroke of PI, HI and DI, respectively. PI and HI were not different from each other for all the stroke cycles, while DI was significantly different from PI and HI for all the stroke cycles (p<0.0001). Analysis with the profilometer showed that the smoothest surface was produced by the PI followed by the HI. The DI produced a surface that was significantly rougher than the surface produced by the PI or HI.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that diamond-coated ultrasonic instruments will effectively plane roots, and that caution should be used during periodontal root planing procedures. Additionally, the diamond-coated instruments will produce a rougher surface than the plain inserts or the hand curettes.

Comparative clinical responses related to the use of various periodontal instrumentation

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate in vivo the effectiveness of scaling and root planing of a power-driven mechanism compared with hand instruments and ultrasonic insert alone with a split-mouth design after 3 and 6 months.

METHODS

Healing events after initial periodontal therapy were investigated in 20 patients with moderate-to-severe adult periodontitis. Plaque index (PlI), bleeding on probing (PBI), probing pocket depth (PPD), probing attachment level (PAL) and number of moderate and deep pockets (NMP, NDP) were recorded at baseline and 3 and 6 months after treatment. Oral hygiene instruction was provided for each patient. Randomly assigned quadrants per patient were scaled and root planed with hand instrumentation (curettes, hoes and files), with reciprocating power-driven instruments, with ultrasonic scaler alone and with the combined use of ultrasonic scaler and power-driven inserts. The Friedman test was applied to test the significance of difference between the various methods of root instrumentation. Repeated measures of analysis of variance (manova) were used to analyse the time effect on the different treatments.

RESULTS

At the 6-month evaluation, all groups in the scaling and root planing treatment presented with an improvement in the measured clinical parameters, as compared with baseline. No statistical differences (p>0.05) were observed in the assessed periodontal indices among the study sites between the four groups for either treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Under our experimental conditions, this clinical study demonstrates that mechanized root planing with power-driven instruments, as effective as the usual procedures (hand and sonic instruments), represents a satisfactory and alternative means of nonsurgical root therapy.

Local Anti-Infective Therapy: Mechanical and Physical Approaches. A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Although mechanical non-surgical therapy (scaling and root planing) is the most common means of initial treatment of periodontal diseases, the relative clinical efficacy of various methods, including manual versus machine-driven, with or without adjunctive agents, has not been determined.

RATIONALE

This systematic review analyzes the literature in an effort to identify the most effective therapies, based on both clinical and patient-centered outcomes.

FOCUSED QUESTION

In patients with periodontitis, what is the effect of mechanically-driven instrumentation (e.g., power-driven) and/or subgingival irrigation with and without manual instrumentation compared to manual instrumentation alone?

SEARCH PROTOCOL

Two investigators examined MEDLINE and the Cochrane Oral Health Group specialized registry for clinical trials published in English. Hand searches were performed of the International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry, Journal of Clinical Periodontology, Journal of Periodontology, and Journal of Periodontal Research. Searches were performed for articles published through April 2002. Editors of these journals were asked to provide information on articles currently under review. In addition, an electronic discussion group on periodontal diseases and treatment was contacted, as were manufacturers of manual and mechanical instruments and of adjunctive agents.

SELECTION CRITERIA

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Only randomized clinical trials, cohort studies, or case-control studies at least 3 months long were included. All studies had to compare manual instrumentation (MI; scaling and root planing [SRP]) alone with some other form of non-surgical therapy. These included MI versus mechanically-driven instruments (MDI) alone; MI versus MI plus MDI; MI versus MDI plus an agent (e.g., chlorhexidine); and MI versus subgingival irrigation (SGI) delivered in conjunction with MI or MDI.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

Studies not meeting the inclusion criteria or those treating periodontal diseases as a manifestation or complication of some other disease or disorder were not included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Probing depth, clinical attachment level, bleeding on probing, and gingival recession were the primary outcomes. Because of the heterogeneity of the patient populations, treatments, and outcome measures, meta-analysis was not appropriate. Only in-study data were compared. Four of the studies required extrapolating data from figures and graphs, resulting in questionable accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

1. Nine studies, representing a study population of 129, were included in the review. 2. Five studies compared MI with MDI alone. The other 4 compared MI alone to MI plus SGI or subgingival tissue treatment. 3. There was comparable efficacy between MI and MDI when treating single-rooted teeth. 4. The use of SGI or subgingival tissue treatment as an adjunct to MI provided no additional benefit compared to MI alone. 5. Findings reported in the review must be interpreted with considerable caution, as lack of study heterogeneity made meta-analysis unfeasible and the need to extrapolate outcomes values from graphs and figures may have resulted in some inaccuracy.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

1. Manual and mechanically-driven instrumentation appears comparable in affecting improved clinical outcomes. 2. Instrumentation time for MI and MDI were similar, except for 1 study in which MDI was significantly shorter. 3. Adjunctive SGI plus MI and subgingival tissue treatment result in similar clinical outcomes when compared to MI alone. 4. If study data are to be effectively and analytically combined to facilitate meaningful comparisons of treatment outcomes, detailed and standardized study designs must be developed and used consistently in clinical trials.

A systematic review of efficacy of machine-driven and manual subgingival debridement in the treatment of chronic periodontitis

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this systematic review was to determine the efficacy of machine-driven compared with manual subgingival debridement in the treatment of periodontitis.

BACKGROUND

Mechanical debridement of the periodontal pocket plays a pivotal role in the treatment of periodontitis.

METHODS

A literature search for controlled clinical trials with at least 6 months' follow-up comparing machine-driven instruments with hand instruments for the treatment of chronic periodontitis was performed up to April 2001. Screening of titles and abstracts as well as data extraction was conducted independently by two reviewers (J.T. & T.F.F.). As primary outcome variable, the prevention of tooth loss was used; secondary outcome variables were the prevention of disease progression, the resolution of anatomical defects and the resolution of gingival inflammation. Efficiency was assessed by mean time needed to treat one tooth.

RESULTS

From a total of 419 abstracts, 27 articles were included for the review. The weighted kappa score for agreement between the two reviewers was 0.77, 95% CI: 0.65-0.89, indicating substantial agreement. No study reported on the selected primary outcome variables. Using clinical attachment gain, probing pocket depth reduction or bleeding on probing reduction as outcome variables, there appeared to be no differences between ultrasonic/sonic and manual debridement. No major differences in the frequency or severity of adverse effects were found. However no meta-analysis could be performed on any of the previously mentioned parameters. Ultrasonic/sonic debridement was found to take significantly less time, i.e. 36.6%, than debridement using hand instruments (P = 0.0002, 95% CI of the standardized effect estimate: 0.39-1.37, heterogeneity P = 0.77).

CONCLUSIONS

With respect to clinical outcome measures, the available data do not indicate a difference between ultrasonic/sonic and manual debridement in the treatment of chronic periodontitis for single-rooted teeth; however, the evidence for this is not very strong. In addition, ultrasonic/sonic subgingival debridement requires less time than hand instrumentation. Further research is needed to assess the efficacy of machine-driven debridement on multirooted teeth and clinical outcome variables having tangible benefit to the patients should be used.

Efficacy of subgingival calculus removal with Er:YAG laser compared to mechanical debridement: an in situ study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the present study was to compare the effectiveness of subgingival calculus removal from periodontally involved root surfaces with an Er:YAG laser compared to hand instrumentation in situ.

METHODS

The mesial and distal surfaces of 30 single-rooted teeth with untreated periodontitis were treated either by hand instrumentation (scaling and root planing (SRP)) or by Er:YAG laser irradiation with the aim of achieving a calculus-free root surface. Subgingival plaque samples were obtained before and immediately after treatment for microbiological evaluation by culture and DNA probe analysis. The teeth were extracted and the residual calculus was measured by means of digitized planimetry. The morphology of the root surface was evaluated by scanning electron microscopy, and undecalcified sections were analyzed to determine residual calculus and the extent of cementum removal following both treatments.

RESULTS

Following laser irradiation, 68.4+/-14.4% of the root surface was calculus free in contrast to 93.9+/-3.7% after SRP when both treatments were performed for the same time (2:15+/-1:00 min). If laser irradiation was allowed twice the time used for hand instrumentation, 83.3+/-5.7% of the root surface was devoid of calculus. The effectiveness of both treatments was not related to initial probing depth. The histologic evaluation showed that after SRP 73.2% of root dentin was completely denuded from cementum, while only a minimal cementum reduction was apparent after laser irradiation. Both treatment modalities resulted in a similar reduction of periodontopathogens.

DISCUSSION

The present investigation could demonstrate the in vivo capability of the Er:YAG laser to remove calculus from periodontally involved root surfaces, although the effectiveness did not reach that achieved by hand instrumentation. The lack of cementum removal in contrast to SRP may qualify the laser as an alternative approach during supportive periodontal therapy.

[Scanning electron microscopy analysis on root surfaces before and after scalling and citric acid and EDTA conditioning: an "in vitro" study]

The most benefic root surface for periodontal regeneration has not been known. Looking for this surface this study used 14 human teeth prepared as testing corpus and treated with scaling and conditioning with citric acid and EDTA, and analysed in scanning electron microscopy. The health teeth surfaces showed regular grains representing broken periodontal ligament fibers by exodontics. The contaminated surfaces showed calculus masses, very porous, and resorption areas. When scalled with hand curettes the surfaces was covered by smear layer. The citric acid conditioning was efficient on smear layer removal, as well as the EDTA gel, and the EDTA liquid solution was not efficient on smear removal.

Clinical significance of non-surgical periodontal therapy: an evidence-based perspective of scaling and root planing

Analysis of Egyptian hieroglyphics and medical papyri indicate that non-surgical periodontal treatment was common 3000-4000 years ago. Even today, scaling and root planing (SRP) remains an essential part of successful periodontal therapy. The collective evidence from numerous clinical trials reveals a consistency of clinical response in the treatment of chronic periodontitis by SRP using manual, sonic, or ultrasonic instrumentation. Thus, SRP remains the 'gold standard' to which more recently developed therapeutic modalities must be compared. Inherent to the clinical evaluation of SRP are such concerns as manual versus sonic and ultrasonic instrumentation, control of sub-gingival bacterial populations, removal of calculus, root smoothness and changes in various clinical parameters, e.g. probing depth, attachment levels, bleeding on probing and gingival inflammation. Lastly, an abbreviated discussion is presented on a relatively new paradigm of complete mouth 'disinfection' in a compressed time-frame that includes SRP as a significant component of the treatment regimen.

Antimicrobial effects of mechanical debridement

Self-performed plaque removal using manual or powered toothbrushes and interdental cleaning devices is improved in subjects that have received oral hygiene instructions. Personal oral hygiene coupled with regular professional supragingival debridement may further improve the level of plaque control but still fails to achieve a completely plaque-free dentition. Both patient-performed and professional supragingival plaque removal has an effect on subgingival microbiota that is limited to the marginal 3 mm of the periodontal pocket. At sites with 4 mm or more of probing depth, only subgingival scaling leads to a significant reduction of the bacterial load. The subgingival microflora can be further reduced by pocket elimination surgery. Due to the sequence of bacterial recolonization that occurs following mechanical debridement, the level of periodontal pathogens such as B. forsythus, P. gingivalis and T. denticola may be reduced for several months. Mechanical debridement also influences the patient's immune system response, resulting in antibody titers and avidity against periodontal pathogens. As a basis for the restoration and maintenance of periodontal health, repeated subgingival debridement, as performed in supportive periodontal therapy, can reduce the number and proportions of periodontopathogenic bacteria in subgingival plaque. However, intensive subgingival scaling and root planing should be avoided in sites that probe less than 3 mm, as this is likely to traumatize the periodontium and cause attachment loss.

Nonsurgical periodontal therapy

Regular home care by the patient in addition to professional removal of subgingival plaque is generally very effective in controlling most inflammatory periodontal diseases. When disease does recur, despite frequent recall, it can usually be attributed to lack of sufficient supragingival and subgingival plaque control or to other risk factors that influence host response, such as diabetes or smoking. Causative factors contributing to recurrent disease include deep inaccessible pockets, overhangs, poor crown margins and plaque-retentive calculus. In most cases, simply performing a thorough periodontal debridement under local anesthesia will stop disease progression and result in improvement in the clinical signs and symptoms of active disease. If however, clinical signs of disease activity persist following thorough mechanical therapy, such as increased pocket depths, loss of attachment and bleeding on probing, other pharmacotherapeutic therapies should be considered. Augmenting scaling and root planing or maintenance visits with adjunctive chemotherapeutic agents for controlling plaque and gingivitis could be as simple as placing the patient on an antimicrobial mouthrinse and/or toothpaste with agents such as fluorides, chlorhexidine or triclosan, to name a few. Since supragingival plaque reappears within hours or days after its removal, it is important that patients have access to effective alternative chemotherapeutic products that could help them achieve adequate supragingival plaque control. Recent studies, for example, have documented the positive effect of triclosan toothpaste on the long-term maintenance of both gingivitis and periodontitis patients. Daily irrigation with a powered irrigation device, with or without an antimicrobial agent, is also useful for decreasing the inflammation associated with gingivitis and periodontitis. Clinically significant changes in probing depths and attachment levels are not usually expected with irrigation alone. Recent reports, however, would indicate that, when daily irrigation with water was added to a regular oral hygiene home regimen, a significant reduction in probing depth, bleeding on probing and Gingival Index was observed. A significant reduction in cytokine levels (interleukin-1beta and prostaglandin E2, which are associated with destructive changes in inflamed tissues and bone resorption also occurs. If patient-applied antimicrobial therapy is insufficient in preventing, arresting, or reversing the disease progression, then professionally applied antimicrobial agents should be considered including sustained local drug delivery products. Other, more broadly based pharmacotherapeutic agents may be indicated for multiple failing sites. Such agents would include systemic antibiotics or host modulating drugs used in conjunction with periodontal debridement. More aggressive types of juvenile periodontitis or severe rapidly advancing adult periodontitis usually require a combination of surgical intervention in conjunction with systemic antibiotics and generally are not controlled with nonsurgical anti-infective therapy alone. It should be noted, however, that, to date, no home care products or devices currently available can completely control or eliminate the pathogenic plaques associated with periodontal diseases for extended periods of time. Daily home care and frequent recall are still paramount for long-term success. Nonsurgical therapy remains the cornerstone of periodontal treatment. Attention to detail, patient compliance and proper selection of adjunctive antimicrobial agents for sustained plaque control are important elements in achieving successful long-term results. Frequent re-evaluation and careful monitoring allows the practitioner the opportunity to intervene early in the disease state, to reverse or arrest the progression of periodontal disease with meticulous nonsurgical anti-infective therapy.

Clinical comparison of microporous biocompatible composite of PMMA, PHEMA and calcium hydroxide grafts and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene barrier membranes in human mandibular molar Class II furcations. A case series

BACKGROUND

Class II furcations present difficult treatment problems. Several treatment approaches to obtain furcation fill have been used with varying success.

METHODS

The response of mandibular Class II furcations to treatment with either a microporous biocompatible composite of PMMA (poly-methyl-methacrylate), PHEMA (poly-hydroxyl-ethyl methacrylate) and calcium hydroxide graft synthetic bone (HTR) replacement graft material; ePTFE barrier membrane; or a combination of the two was evaluated in trios of mandibular molars with Class II furcations in 8 patients with moderate to advanced periodontitis. Following initial preparation, full-thickness flaps were raised in the areas being treated, the bone and furcation defects debrided of granulomatous tissue, and the involved root surfaces mechanically prepared and chemically conditioned. By random allocation, HTR, ePTFE, or a combination of both was placed into and/or fitted over the furcations, packed and/or secured in place, and the host flap replaced or coronally positioned with sutures. Postsurgical deplaquing was performed every 10 days leading up to ePTFE removal at approximately 6 weeks. Continuing periodontal maintenance therapy was provided until surgical reentry at 6 months for documentation and any further necessary treatment.

RESULTS

Direct clinical measurements demonstrated essentially similar clinical results with all 3 treatments for bone and soft tissue changes. There were no statistically or clinically significant differences except for better horizontal amount and percent defect fill with HTR alone. Four of 8 furcations became Class I clinically with HTR alone, 5 of 8 became Class I with ePTFE alone, and 5 of 8 with combination treatment. The only complete furcation closure occurred with HTR.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study suggest essentially equal clinical results with HTR bone replacement graft material alone, ePTFE barrier alone, and a combination of the two in mandibular molar Class II furcations. However, a real difference may not have been detected based on the small number of subjects in the study.

A comparative in vitro study of a magnetostrictive and a piezoelectric ultrasonic scaling instrument

BACKGROUND

The effects of magnetostrictive ultrasonic instruments and piezoelectric ultrasonic instruments on tooth surfaces seem to differ with regards to root debridement.

AIM

The purpose of this study was to compare a magnetostrictive ultrasonic scaling instrument with a piezoelectric ultrasonic scaling instrument and a hand curette regarding time taken, calculus removal, tooth surface roughness (Ra), and SEM examination before and after instrumentation.

METHODS

30 extracted human teeth with subgingival calculus were assigned to one of three treatment groups (n=10). The working force was standardised for both ultrasonic instruments at 200 g and for the curette at 500 g.

RESULTS

The results revealed that the time needed for instrumentation was 126.1+/-38.2 s for the curette, significantly more than for the piezoelectric ultrasonic instrument (74.1+/-27.6 s; p<0.05) and 104.9+/-25.4 s for the magnetostrictive ultrasonic instrument. Remaining calculus was similar for all three groups. The end Ra values were significantly worse for the piezoelectric instrument (2.02+/-0.41; p<0.05) compared to 1.42+/-0.48 for the curette and 1.36+/-0.41 for the magnetostrictive instrument. The SEM examination revealed the smoothest surfaces but, subjectively, the most tooth substance loss after the curette, followed by the magnetostrictive instrument, with the least substance loss, and then the piezoelectric instrument, with medium substance loss.

CONCLUSION

The piezoelectric ultrasonic scaler was more efficient than the magnetostrictive ultrasonic scaler in removing calculus but left the instrumented tooth surface rougher.

Clinical comparison of bioactive glass bone replacement graft material and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene barrier membrane in treating human mandibular molar class II furcations

BACKGROUND

Class II furcations present difficult treatment problems and historically several treatment approaches to obtain furcation fill have been used.

METHODS

The response of mandibular Class II facial furcations to treatment with either bioactive glass (PG) bone replacement graft material or expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) barrier membrane was evaluated in 27 pairs of mandibular molars in 27 patients with moderate to advanced periodontitis. Following initial preparation, full thickness flaps were raised in the area being treated, the bone and furcation defects debrided of granulomatous tissue, and the involved root surfaces mechanically prepared and chemically conditioned. By random allocation, PG or ePTFE was placed into or fitted over the furcations, packed or secured in place, and the host flap replaced or coronally positioned with sutures. Postsurgical deplaquing was performed every 10 days leading up to ePTFE removal at about 6 weeks. Continuing periodontal maintenance therapy was provided until surgical reentry at 6 months for documentation and any further necessary treatment.

RESULTS

Direct clinical measurements demonstrated essentially similar clinical results with both treatments for bone and soft tissue changes. There were no statistically or clinically significant differences (e.g., mean horizontal furcation fill 1.4 mm PG, 1.3 mm ePTFE; mean percent horizontal furcation fill 31.6% PG, 31.1% ePTFE, both P>0.85). Seventeen of the PG treated and 18 of the ePTFE furcations became Class I clinically and 1 furcation completely closed clinically with each treatment. Intrapatient comparisons showed similar horizontal furcation responses with both treatments.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study suggest essentially equal clinical results with PG bone replacement graft material and e-PTFE barriers in mandibular molar Class II furcations. PG use was associated with simpler application and required no additional material removal procedures.

Comparison of four methods of assessing root surface debridement

BACKGROUND

While there is great interest in measuring the efficacy of root surface debridement, there is little consensus on how this might be best achieved. The aim of this study was therefore to compare four different methods of assessing root surface debridement in their ability to discriminate between ultrasonically instrumented root surfaces and non-instrumented control surfaces.

METHODS

Single-session subgingival root debridement was performed by an experienced operator on 30 teeth prior to their extraction. Following extraction, efficacy of root surface debridement was measured by percentage of remaining calculus, instrument efficiency, modified instrument efficiency, and percentage apical plaque border. In addition, the effect of probing depth landmark (apical plaque border versus connective tissue attachment) on outcomes was assessed.

RESULTS

The results indicated that percentage apical plaque border demonstrated highly statistically significant differences between instrumented and control surfaces (P= 0.02). No other assessment method was able to discriminate between instrumented and non-instrumented surfaces, and this may be a function of the low amount of root surface calculus in the experimental sample. In addition, choice of probing depth landmark had a notable effect on the outcomes for instrument efficiency and modified instrument efficiency. Ninety-five percent limits of agreement of interexaminer reproducibility were found to be much higher than intra-examiner measurement for all four methods of assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

Percentage apical plaque border appeared to be potentially more useful than other methods for assessing the efficacy of debridement of periodontally involved root surfaces, particularly for measuring instrument penetrability.