-
The Saudi Dental Journal Jan 2021This systematic review aims to assess the efficacy chlorhexidine chip as an adjunctive therapy of scaling and root planning on periodontal disease treatment. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review aims to assess the efficacy chlorhexidine chip as an adjunctive therapy of scaling and root planning on periodontal disease treatment.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
This study follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines (PRISMA) and was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42019148221). The search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane databases until April 2020. The PICO question was: "Is the chlorhexidine chip (CHX) effective as an adjunctive therapy of scaling and root planning on periodontal disease treatment?". Inclusion criteria involved: randomized controlled clinical trials, with a minimum of 15 patients included on the sample and each patient has two sites of probing depth of ≥5 mm; The minimum follow up was at least 1 months of follow-up and the outcomes present in the studies probing depth (PD), plaque index (PI) and clinical attachment level (CAL) after scaling and root planning (SRP).
RESULTS
After searching the databases, 13 articles were selected for qualitative and 8 for quantitative analysis. Were included 427 patients, with a mean age of 45.6 years. The results shown that the association of chlorhexidine chips to scaling and root planning reduce periodontal pocket depths ( < 0.00001; MD -0.77 [CI -1.0 to -0.55]; I = 23%, = 0.24), gain on the clinical attachment level ( < 0.0001; MD -0.57 [CI -0.86 to -0.27]; I = 33%, P = 0.18P < 0.0001) and reduction on plaque index (P = 0.04; MD -0.23 [CI -0.45 to -0.01]; I = 91%, P < 0.00001).
CONCLUSIONS
Thus, we can conclude that chlorhexidine chip when used associated to scaling and root planning promoted a significant improvement the reduction of periodontal diseases.
PubMed: 33473236
DOI: 10.1016/j.sdentj.2020.11.002 -
Pharmaceutics May 2022For many years, the use of probiotics in periodontitis treatment was reflected in their abilities to control the immune response of the host to the presence of... (Review)
Review
For many years, the use of probiotics in periodontitis treatment was reflected in their abilities to control the immune response of the host to the presence of pathogenic microorganisms and to upset periodontopathogens. Accordingly, the aim of the present study was to assess the use of probiotics as adjuvant therapy on clinical periodontal parameters throughout a systematic review and meta-analysis. The literature was screened, up to 4 June 2021, by two independent reviewers (L.H. and R.B.) in four electronic databases: PubMed (MedLine), ISI Web of Science, Scielo, and Scopus. Only clinical trials that report the effect of the use of probiotics as adjuvants in the treatment of periodontal disease were included. Comparisons were carried out using Review Manager Software version 5.3.5 (The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark). A total of 21 studies were considered for the meta-analysis. For the index plaque, the use of probiotics did not improve this clinical parameter (p = 0.16). On the other hand, for the periodontal pocket depth, the clinical attachment loss, the bleeding on probing, and the use of probiotics as adjuvant therapy resulted in an improvement of these parameters, since the control group achieved statistically higher values of this parameter (p < 0.001; p < 0.001; and p = 0.005, respectively). This study suggests that the use of probiotics led to an improvement in periodontal pocket depth, clinical attachment loss, and bleeding on probing parameters. On the other hand, this protocol seems to not be beneficial for the index plaque parameter.
PubMed: 35631603
DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics14051017 -
International Journal of Dental Hygiene Feb 2022The present study aimed to establish the efficacy of sodium hypochlorite mouthwash (NaOCl-MW) compared with a control mouthwash on plaque and clinical parameters of... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
The present study aimed to establish the efficacy of sodium hypochlorite mouthwash (NaOCl-MW) compared with a control mouthwash on plaque and clinical parameters of periodontal disease.
METHODS
MEDLINE-PubMed, Embase and Cochrane-CENTRAL databases were searched for clinical trials on patients with gingivitis or periodontitis that assessed the effect of NaOCl-MW in comparison with a negative or positive control on plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), and bleeding index (BI) scores and probing pocket depth (PPD). Data were extracted from the eligible studies.
RESULTS
Seven eligible papers were retrieved, which together represented six clinical trials. The studies showed considerable heterogeneity regarding methodological and clinical aspects that did not permit a meta-analysis. Two of the three studies in which NaOCl-MW was compared with a negative control showed that NaOCl-MW significantly reduced PI, GI and BI, and no effect was found on PPD. In three studies, NaOCl-MW was assessed using chlorhexidine mouthwash (CHX-MW) as a positive control; no difference was found for GI and BI. One of the three comparisons showed a statistically significant PI score favouring NaOCl-MW. One study measured PPD and found it to be significant in favour of NaOCl-MW.
CONCLUSIONS
Studies with a negative control group provided very weak quality evidence for a very small beneficial effect of NaOCl-MW on PI, GI and BI scores. Studies with a positive control group provided very weak quality evidence that NaOCl-MW had a similar effect as CHX-MW on PI, GI and BI scores. The outcome for PPD was inconclusive.
Topics: Chlorhexidine; Dental Plaque; Gingivitis; Humans; Mouthwashes; Periodontal Diseases; Sodium Hypochlorite
PubMed: 33971082
DOI: 10.1111/idh.12510 -
Clinical Oral Investigations Sep 2021The present study aimed to systematically assess current evidence on effects of locally delivered antibiotics during periodontal surgery compared to periodontal surgery... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
The present study aimed to systematically assess current evidence on effects of locally delivered antibiotics during periodontal surgery compared to periodontal surgery alone on clinical attachment level (CAL) gain, probing pocket depth (PPD) reduction, recession depth (RD) changes, gingival index (GI), bleeding on probing (BOP), and plaque index (PI).
METHODOLOGY
MEDLINE-PubMed, Cochrane-CENTRAL and Scopus databases were searched up to April 2021 for randomized clinical trials (RCT), evaluating effects of locally delivered antibiotics during periodontal surgery. CAL gain served as primary, while PPD reduction, RD changes, GI and PI as secondary outcomes. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess possible bias. Data were extracted, and meta-analysis was performed where appropriate.
RESULT
Screening of 2314 papers resulted in nine eligible studies. No adverse events were reported. Data on outcome variables were pooled and analyzed using generic inverse variance model and presented as weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Statistically significant improvements in favor of antibiotics' delivery were observed in studies with follow-up of ≤6 months for CAL gain (WMD = 0.61 mm (95% CI [0.07, 1.14]; p = 0.03), PPD reduction (WMD = 0.41 mm (95% CI [0.02, 0.80]; p = 0.04)) and BOP (WMD = -28.47% (95% CI [-33.00, -23.94]); p < 0.001), while for GI improvements were notable for >6 to 12 months (WMD = -0.27 (95% CI [-0.49, -0.06]; p = 0.01)).
CONCLUSION
Within the current review's limitations, locally delivered antibiotics during surgical periodontal therapy results in post-surgical improvements for CAL, PPD, and BOP (≤6 months) with a longer-lasting GI improvement. Further randomized controlled trials are needed with true periodontal end-points to assess the ideal antibiotic agent, dosage, and delivery methods.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
Local delivery of antibiotics during periodontal surgery improved clinical parameters for up to 6-month follow-up, with beneficial longer effects on gingival inflammation. Within the current study's limitation, the presented evidence could support the elective usage of locally delivered antibiotics during surgical periodontal therapy.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Dental Care; Dental Scaling; Humans; Oral Surgical Procedures; Periodontal Index
PubMed: 34283285
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-021-04056-7 -
Materials (Basel, Switzerland) Mar 2022The aim of this systematic review of randomized controlled trials was to evaluate the adjunctive use of leucocyte- and platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) in periodontal... (Review)
Review
The aim of this systematic review of randomized controlled trials was to evaluate the adjunctive use of leucocyte- and platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) in periodontal endosseous and furcation defects, as compared without L-PRF. The endosseous defect group was subclassified into: L-PRF/open flap debridement (L-PRF/OFD) versus OFD, L-PRF/osseous graft (L-PRF/OG) versus OG, L-PRF/Emdogain (L-PRF/EMD) versus EMD, and L-PRF/guided tissue regeneration (L-PRF/GTR) versus GTR. The furcation defect group was subclassified into L-PRF/OFD versus OFD, and L-PRF/OG versus OG. Mean difference, 95% confidence intervals and forest plots were calculated for probing pocket depth (PPD), clinical attachment level (CAL) and radiographic defect depth (DD). Nineteen studies concerning systemically healthy non-smokers were included. The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis showed in two- and/or three-wall endosseous defects that the adjunctive use of L-PRF to OFD or OG was significantly beneficial for PPD reduction, CAL gain and DD reduction, as compared without L-PRF. Furthermore, the data showed that for two- and/or three-wall endosseous defects, the adjunctive use of L-PRF to GTR was significantly beneficial for CAL and DD improvement, whereas adding L-PRF to EMD had no significant effect, and that for class II furcation defects, the addition of L-PRF to OFD was significantly beneficial for PPD, CAL and DD improvement, whereas the addition of L-PRF to OG was significantly clinically beneficial. In conclusion, this systematic review and meta-analysis found that there was significant clinical and radiographic additive effectiveness of L-PRF to OFD and to OG in two- and/or three-wall periodontal endosseous defects of systemically healthy non-smokers, as compared without L-PRF.
PubMed: 35329540
DOI: 10.3390/ma15062088 -
Dental Research Journal 2023Obesity and periodontitis are two commonly occurring disorders that affect a considerable amount of the world's population. Several studies have mentioned that there may...
BACKGROUND
Obesity and periodontitis are two commonly occurring disorders that affect a considerable amount of the world's population. Several studies have mentioned that there may be a link between the two. The purpose of this systematic review was to determine whether there was a difference in response to nonsurgical periodontal therapies (NSPTs) between obese and nonobese individuals.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An online search was assembled with a combination of Medical Subject Headings terms and free-text words of the literature published up to December 2020, to identify interventional studies limited to an adult human population. Titles, abstracts, and finally full texts were scrutinized for possible inclusion by two independent investigators. Reduction in periodontal pocket depth was the primary parameter used to assess the outcome of NSPT.
RESULTS
The primary search yielded 639 significant titles and abstracts. After filtering, data extraction, and quality assessment, 34 full-text studies were selected. All studies matching inclusion criteria, suggest a positive association between obesity and periodontal disease.
CONCLUSION
Although a possible correlation exists between periodontitis and obesity, as with other oral-systemic disease implications, some controversy exists. While some studies have reported a distinct correlation between periodontitis and obesity, other papers have suggested only moderate or no association between the two conditions at all. These results advise of a difference between response to NSPT amid obese and nonobese individuals. However, with few quality studies and variable reported findings, there is limited evidence of any significant difference in clinical practice. However, it can be a positive warning that obesity is a risk factor toward the outcome of periodontal disease treatment.
PubMed: 38020246
DOI: No ID Found -
Clinical Oral Investigations Jun 2022To assess the potential additional benefit of the local application of enamel matrix derivative (EMD) on the clinical outcomes following non-surgical periodontal therapy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To assess the potential additional benefit of the local application of enamel matrix derivative (EMD) on the clinical outcomes following non-surgical periodontal therapy (NSPT) (steps 1 and 2 periodontal therapy).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed in several electronic databases, including Medline/PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Register of Central Trials (CENTRAL), LILACS, and grey literature. Only randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) were eligible for inclusion. Clinical attachment level (CAL) change (primary outcome), probing pocket depth (PPD), and bleeding on probing (BoP) reductions (secondary outcomes) were evaluated. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (RoB 2.0) was used to assess the quality of the included trials. Weighted mean differences (WMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) between test and control sites were estimated using a random-effect model for amount of mean CAL and PPD change.
RESULTS
Six RCTs were included for the qualitative analysis, while data from 4 studies were used for meta-analysis. Overall analysis of CAL gain (3 studies) and PPD reduction (4 studies) presented WMD of 0.14 mm (p = 0.74; CI 95% - 0.66; 0.94) and 0.46 mm (p = 0.25; CI 95% - 0.33; 1.26) in favor of NSPT + EMD compared to NSPT alone respectively. Statistical heterogeneity was found to be high in both cases (I = 79% and 87%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
Within their limitations, the present data indicate that the local application of EMD does not lead to additional clinical benefits after 3 to 12 months when used as an adjunctive to NSPT. However, due to the high heterogeneity among the studies, additional well-designed RCTs are needed to provide further evidence on this clinical indication for the use of EMD.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
The adjunctive use of EMD to NSPT does not seem to additionally improve the clinical outcomes obtained with NSPT alone.
Topics: Dental Care; Dental Scaling; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 35389113
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-022-04474-1 -
International Journal of Dental Hygiene Aug 2016Periodontal dressing has been advocated and showed some positive outcomes for placing over the surgical site after periodontal surgery. However, little is known about... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Periodontal dressing has been advocated and showed some positive outcomes for placing over the surgical site after periodontal surgery. However, little is known about its effect on non-surgical therapy.
PURPOSE
The aim of this review was to assess the clinical effect of periodontal dressing when used after non-surgical therapy.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Two examiners performed an electronic search in several databases for relevant articles published in English up to November 2013. Selected studies were randomized human clinical trials (prospective or retrospective trials) with the clear aim of investigating the effect of periodontal dressing placement upon periodontal non-surgical mechanical therapy. Data were extracted from the included articles for analysis.
RESULTS
Three randomized clinical trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria and thus were included in the data analysis. Statistical analysis could not be carried out due to the lack of clear data of the included studies. However, descriptive analysis showed its effectiveness in improving clinical parameters such as gain of clinical attachment level and reduction of probing pocket depth.
CONCLUSION
Placement of periodontal dressing right after non-surgical mechanical therapy can be beneficial in improving overall short-term clinical outcomes, although more controlled studies are still needed to validate this finding.
Topics: Chronic Periodontitis; Dental Scaling; Humans; Periodontal Attachment Loss; Periodontal Dressings; Periodontal Index; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Root Planing; Treatment Outcome; Wound Healing
PubMed: 25721470
DOI: 10.1111/idh.12130 -
Nutrients Feb 2022(1) Background: Periodontal diseases are a global health concern. They are multi-stage, progressive inflammatory diseases triggered by the inflammation of the gums in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The Clinical, Microbiological, and Immunological Effects of Probiotic Supplementation on Prevention and Treatment of Periodontal Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
(1) Background: Periodontal diseases are a global health concern. They are multi-stage, progressive inflammatory diseases triggered by the inflammation of the gums in response to periodontopathogens and may lead to the destruction of tooth-supporting structures, tooth loss, and systemic health problems. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effects of probiotic supplementation on the prevention and treatment of periodontal disease based on the assessment of clinical, microbiological, and immunological outcomes. (2) Methods: This study was registered under PROSPERO (CRD42021249120). Six databases were searched: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Dentistry and Oral Science Source. The meta-analysis assessed the effects of probiotic supplementation on the prevention and treatment of periodontal diseases and reported them using Hedge's g standardized mean difference (SMD). (3) Results: Of the 1883 articles initially identified, 64 randomized clinical trials were included in this study. The results of this meta-analysis indicated statistically significant improvements after probiotic supplementation in the majority of the clinical outcomes in periodontal disease patients, including the plaque index (SMD = 0.557, 95% CI: 0.228, 0.885), gingival index, SMD = 0.920, 95% CI: 0.426, 1.414), probing pocket depth (SMD = 0.578, 95% CI: 0.365, 0.790), clinical attachment level (SMD = 0.413, 95% CI: 0.262, 0.563), bleeding on probing (SMD = 0.841, 95% CI: 0.479, 1.20), gingival crevicular fluid volume (SMD = 0.568, 95% CI: 0.235, 0.902), reduction in the subgingival periodontopathogen count of (SMD = 0.402, 95% CI: 0.120, 0.685), (SMD = 0.392, 95% CI: 0.127, 0.658), and (SMD = 0.341, 95% CI: 0.050, 0.633), and immunological markers MMP-8 (SMD = 0.819, 95% CI: 0.417, 1.221) and IL-6 (SMD = 0.361, 95% CI: 0.079, 0.644). (4) Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that probiotic supplementation improves clinical parameters, and reduces the periodontopathogen load and pro-inflammatory markers in periodontal disease patients. However, we were unable to assess the preventive role of probiotic supplementation due to the paucity of studies. Further clinical studies are needed to determine the efficacy of probiotic supplementation in the prevention of periodontal diseases.
Topics: Biomarkers; Dietary Supplements; Humans; Inflammation; Periodontal Diseases; Probiotics; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 35268009
DOI: 10.3390/nu14051036 -
Frontiers in Bioengineering and... 2023This systematic review with meta-analysis evaluated the antioxidant effect of lycopene as an adjuvant treatment for periodontal disease. PubMed, EMBASE and Web of...
This systematic review with meta-analysis evaluated the antioxidant effect of lycopene as an adjuvant treatment for periodontal disease. PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science databases were consulted. According to the PICOs strategy, inclusion criteria were established for intervention studies Randomized Controlled Trials in Probing depth subjects (participants) treated with conventional treatment and lycopene (intervention) compared to patients treated with conventional treatment (control) in which periodontal response to treatment (outcome) was assessed. The risk of bias for randomized studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. The methodological quality of the studies included in the meta-analysis was measured using the Jadad scale. Quantitative data were analyzed using six random-effects meta-analyses, taking into account periodontal parameters: Probing Pocket Depth, Clinical Attachment Loss, Bleeding on Probing, Plaque Index, Uric Acid and Gingival Index. Six further meta-analyses were performed, according to the follow-up of the studies (short-, medium- and long-term). Of the 339 studies identified, only 7 met the eligibility criteria. The meta-analysis of the studies according to the parameters evaluated only obtained statistical significance in the assessment of plaque index ( = 0.003). Regarding follow-up periods, PPD was significant ( = 0.03) in the short term. bleeding on probing estimates were significant in the short and medium term ( = 0.008 and = 0.03, respectively), IP was significant in the short and medium term ( = 0.0003 and = 0.01, respectively) and gingival index in the short and medium term ( = 0.002 and = 0.02, respectively). Heterogeneity was high (I >50%) in all assessments, except for Clinical Attachment Loss (I = 16.7%). The results demonstrate that antioxidant treatment with lycopene could be useful as an adjunctive treatment for periodontal disease.
PubMed: 38344076
DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1309851