Magda Mensi1,2, Eleonora Scotti1,2, Annamaria Sordillo1, Raffaele Agosti1, Stefano Calza3. 1. Section of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, Department of Surgical Specialties, Radiological Science and Public Health, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy. 2. U.O.C. Odontostomatologia - ASST degli Spedali Civili di Brescia, Brescia, Italy. 3. Department of Molecular and Translational Medicine, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate through computer software analysis, the efficacy of the use of a plaque disclosing agent as a visual guide for biofilm removal during professional mechanical plaque removal in terms of post-treatment residual plaque area (RPA). METHODS:Thirty-two healthy patients were selected and randomized in two groups to receive a session of professional mechanical plaque removal with air-polishing followed by ultrasonic instrumentation with (Guided Biofilm therapy-GBT) or without (Control) the preliminary application of a plaque disclosing agent as visual guide. The residual plaque area (RPA) was evaluated through re-application of the disclosing agent and computer software analysis, considering the overall tooth surface and the gingival and coronal portions separately. RESULTS: A statistically and clinically significant difference between treatments is observed, with GBT achieving an RPA of 6.1% (4.1-9.1) vs 12.0% (8.2-17.3) of the Control on the Gingival surface and of 3.5% (2.3-5.2) vs 9.0% (6-13.1) on the Coronal, with a proportional reduction going from 49.2% (P-value = .018) on the former surface to more than 60% (P-value = .002) on the latter. CONCLUSION: The application of a plaque disclosing agent to guide plaque removal seems to lead to better biofilm removal.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate through computer software analysis, the efficacy of the use of a plaque disclosing agent as a visual guide for biofilm removal during professional mechanical plaque removal in terms of post-treatment residual plaque area (RPA). METHODS: Thirty-two healthy patients were selected and randomized in two groups to receive a session of professional mechanical plaque removal with air-polishing followed by ultrasonic instrumentation with (Guided Biofilm therapy-GBT) or without (Control) the preliminary application of a plaque disclosing agent as visual guide. The residual plaque area (RPA) was evaluated through re-application of the disclosing agent and computer software analysis, considering the overall tooth surface and the gingival and coronal portions separately. RESULTS: A statistically and clinically significant difference between treatments is observed, with GBT achieving an RPA of 6.1% (4.1-9.1) vs 12.0% (8.2-17.3) of the Control on the Gingival surface and of 3.5% (2.3-5.2) vs 9.0% (6-13.1) on the Coronal, with a proportional reduction going from 49.2% (P-value = .018) on the former surface to more than 60% (P-value = .002) on the latter. CONCLUSION: The application of a plaque disclosing agent to guide plaque removal seems to lead to better biofilm removal.
Authors: Abanoub Riad; Ave Põld; Jana Olak; Hans-Peter Howaldt; Miloslav Klugar; Martin Krsek; Sameh Attia Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-02-08 Impact factor: 4.614