Gaetano Isola1,2, Giovanni Matarese3, Ray C Williams4, Vincenzo Iorio Siciliano5, Angela Alibrandi6, Giancarlo Cordasco1, Luca Ramaglia2. 1. Department of Biomedical, Odontostomatological Sciences and of Morphological and Functional Images, Unit of Periodontology, School of Dentistry, University of Messina, AOU Policlinico "G. Martino", Via Consolare Valeria 1, 98125, Messina, Italy. 2. Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Naples "Federico II", Via G. Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy. 3. Department of Biomedical, Odontostomatological Sciences and of Morphological and Functional Images, Unit of Periodontology, School of Dentistry, University of Messina, AOU Policlinico "G. Martino", Via Consolare Valeria 1, 98125, Messina, Italy. gmatarese@unime.it. 4. Department of Periodontology, UNC School of Dentistry, Campus Box #7450, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-7450, USA. 5. Department of Periodontology, University of Catanzaro, Viale Europa 1, 88100, Catanzaro, Italy. 6. Department of Economics, Unit of Statistics and Mathematical Sciences, University of Messina, Via Pugliatti 1, 98122, Messina, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Chemotherapeutic agents have been widely used as adjuncts for the treatment of chronic periodontitis (CP). This study investigated and compared a desiccant agent as an adjunct to scaling and root planing (SRP) versus SRP alone for the treatment of CP. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Thirty-six patients with CP were studied. Using a split-mouth design, the maxillary right and left quadrants were randomly assigned to SRP plus desiccant (Hybenx® EPIEN Medical, Inc. St. Paul, MN, USA) or SRP alone. Patients were examined on a regular basis for clinical, microbiological, and inflammatory mediator changes over a 1-year period. Clinical attachment level (CAL) was the primary outcome variable. In addition, the red complex bacteria and gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) inflammatory mediators were monitored. RESULTS: Compared to baseline, both treatments demonstrated an improvement in periodontal parameters. Compared to SRP alone, SRP plus desiccant yielded a significant improvement in probing depth (PD) (SRP: 2.23 ± 0.31 mm vs. desiccant: 3.25 ± 0.57 mm, p < 0.05), CAL (SRP: 3.16 ± 0.29 mm vs. desiccant: 4.21 ± 0.34 mm, p < 0.05 mm) and bleeding on probing (BOP) (SRP: 4.56 ± 1.5% vs. desiccant: 34.23 ± 4.2%, p < 0.001) at 12 months. Similarly, in the SRP plus desiccant group, the bacteria of the red complex were significantly reduced (p < 0.05); and the level of inflammatory mediators was significantly reduced (p < 0.003) compared to SRP alone. CONCLUSIONS:SRP plus the desiccant resulted in a greater reduction in clinical, microbial and inflammatory mediators compared to SRP alone. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Desiccant, when combined to SRP, was demonstrated as a significant approach to control the levels of certain periodontal pathogens, inflammatory mediators in patients with CP.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: Chemotherapeutic agents have been widely used as adjuncts for the treatment of chronic periodontitis (CP). This study investigated and compared a desiccant agent as an adjunct to scaling and root planing (SRP) versus SRP alone for the treatment of CP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-six patients with CP were studied. Using a split-mouth design, the maxillary right and left quadrants were randomly assigned to SRP plus desiccant (Hybenx® EPIEN Medical, Inc. St. Paul, MN, USA) or SRP alone. Patients were examined on a regular basis for clinical, microbiological, and inflammatory mediator changes over a 1-year period. Clinical attachment level (CAL) was the primary outcome variable. In addition, the red complex bacteria and gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) inflammatory mediators were monitored. RESULTS: Compared to baseline, both treatments demonstrated an improvement in periodontal parameters. Compared to SRP alone, SRP plus desiccant yielded a significant improvement in probing depth (PD) (SRP: 2.23 ± 0.31 mm vs. desiccant: 3.25 ± 0.57 mm, p < 0.05), CAL (SRP: 3.16 ± 0.29 mm vs. desiccant: 4.21 ± 0.34 mm, p < 0.05 mm) and bleeding on probing (BOP) (SRP: 4.56 ± 1.5% vs. desiccant: 34.23 ± 4.2%, p < 0.001) at 12 months. Similarly, in the SRP plus desiccant group, the bacteria of the red complex were significantly reduced (p < 0.05); and the level of inflammatory mediators was significantly reduced (p < 0.003) compared to SRP alone. CONCLUSIONS: SRP plus the desiccant resulted in a greater reduction in clinical, microbial and inflammatory mediators compared to SRP alone. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Desiccant, when combined to SRP, was demonstrated as a significant approach to control the levels of certain periodontal pathogens, inflammatory mediators in patients with CP.
Entities:
Keywords:
Chronic periodontitis; Desiccants; Local delivery; Microbiology; Randomized controlled trials; Scaling and root planing
Authors: Alexia Vinel; Antoine Al Halabi; Sébastien Roumi; Hélène Le Neindre; Pierre Millavet; Marion Simon; Constance Cuny; Jean-Sébastien Barthet; Pierre Barthet; Sara Laurencin-Dalicieux Journal: Adv Exp Med Biol Date: 2022 Impact factor: 2.622
Authors: Gaetano Isola; Ray C Williams; Alberto Lo Gullo; Luca Ramaglia; Marco Matarese; Vincenzo Iorio-Siciliano; Claudio Cosio; Giovanni Matarese Journal: Clin Rheumatol Date: 2017-10-07 Impact factor: 2.980
Authors: Simone Sprio; Elisabetta Campodoni; Monica Sandri; Lorenzo Preti; Tobias Keppler; Frank A Müller; Nicola M Pugno; Anna Tampieri Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2018-11-15 Impact factor: 5.923