| Literature DB >> 30127307 |
Valentina Candotto1, Dorina Lauritano2, Francesco Carinci3, Carlo Alberto Bignozzi4, Daniele Pazzi5, Francesca Cura6, Marco Severino7, Antonio Scarano8.
Abstract
The use of chemical devices for periodontitis treatment has led to new strategies aiming primarily to control infections. Over the last few years, new chemical devices have been subjected to many scientific and medical studies. The purpose of the present study was to assess the effect of a new silver based chemical devices gel named "Hydrosilver Plus Gel", abbreviated here as Hydrosilver, on the pathogenic microorganisms, using Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) for microbiological analysis. Materials and methods: Ten patients with a diagnosis of chronic periodontitis in the age group >25 years were selected. None of these patients had received any surgical or non-surgical periodontal therapy, and demonstrated radiographic evidence of moderate bone loss. After scaling and root planning, patients received Hydrosilver to be used at home. Four non-adjacent sites in separate quadrants were selected in each patient for monitoring, based on criteria that the sites localise chronic periodontitis. Microbial analysis was analysed at baseline and at Day 15. SPSS program was used for statistical purposes and a paired samples correlation was performed at the end of the observation period.Entities:
Keywords: bacterial load; chronic periodontitis; oral biofilm; red complex
Year: 2018 PMID: 30127307 PMCID: PMC6120029 DOI: 10.3390/ma11081483
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Mean amounts of specific bacterial species before and after Hydrosilver treatment rounded to 1 significant figure AA, Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans; CR, Campylobacter rectus; FN, Fusobacterium nucleatum; PG, Porphyromonas gingivalis; TBL, total bacteria loading; TD, Treponema denticola; TF, Tannerella forsythia; 1, before; 2, after treatment.
| Comparison between Specific Bacteria before and after Treatment | Bacteria Species before and after Treatment | Mean ± (SD) |
|---|---|---|
| Pair 1 | AA1 | 2000 ± 4000 |
| AA2 | 500 ± 1000 | |
| Pair 2 | CR1 | 600 ± 800 |
| CR2 | 2000 ± 6000 | |
| Pair 3 | FN1 | 20,000 ± 40,000 |
| FN2 | 7000 ± 10,000 | |
| Pair 4 | PG1 | 100 ± 300 |
| PG2 | 1 ± 0.1 | |
| Pair 5 | TBL1 | 300,000 ± 2,000,000 |
| TBL2 | 800,000 ± 1,000,000 | |
| Pair 6 | TD1 | 200 ± 500 |
| TD2 | 9 ± 30 | |
| Pair 7 | TF1 | 1000 ± 2000 |
| TF2 | 90 ± 200 |
Samples T test output.
| Comparison between Specific Bacteria before and after Treatment | Bacteria Species before and after Treatment | Mean Value and Standard Deviation | 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SD | Lower | Upper | Sig. | ||
| Pair 1 | AA1-AA2 | 2000 ± 4000 | −1000 | 4000 | 2 |
| Pair 2 | CR1-CR2 | −1000 ± 6000 | −6000 | 3000 | 0.5 |
| Pair 3 | FN1-FN2 | 10,000 ± 40,000 | −10,000 | 40,000 | 0.3 |
| Pair 4 | PG1-PG2 | 100± 300 | −80 | 300 | 0.2 |
| Pair 5 | TBL1-TBL2 | 2,000,000 ± 2,000,000 | 1,000,000 | 3,000,000 | 0.002 |
| Pair 6 | TD1-TD2 | 200 ± 500 | −100 | 600 | 0.2 |
| Pair 7 | TF1-TF2 | 1000 ± 2000 | −700 | 3000 | 0.3 |