Nonsurgical treatment of aggressive periodontitis with photodynamic therapy or systemic antibiotics. Three-month results of a randomized, prospective, controlled clinical study
Summary The aim of this randomized, controlled clinical study was to compare the short-term effects of nonsurgical periodontal therapy with the additional administration of systemic antibiotics (AB) and the same therapy with additional photodynamic therapy (PDT) in the treatment of patients with aggressive periodontitis (AP). Thirty-six patients with AP received full-mouth nonsurgical periodontal treatment (SRP) and were then randomly divided into two groups of 18 subjects each. Group AB received amoxicillin and metronidazole three times a day for 7 days. Group PDT received two applications of PDT on the day of SRP as well as at follow-up after 7 days. The following clinical parameters were measured at baseline and 3 months after therapy: plaque index (PLI), bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), gingival recession (GR), and clinical attachment level (CAL). After 3 months, PD was significantly reduced in both groups (from 5.0 ± 0.8 mm to 3.2 ± 0.4 mm with AB, and 5.1± 0.5 mm to 4.0 ± 0.8 mm with PDT; both p < 0.001), while AB revealed significantly lower values compared to PDT (p = 0.001). In both groups, GR was not significantly changed. CAL was significantly reduced in both groups (PDT: 5.7±0.8 mm to 4.7±1.1 mm; p = 0.011; AB: 5.5 ±1.1 mm to 3.9± 1.0 mm; p < 0.001) and differed significantly between the groups (p = 0.025). The number of residual pockets (PD ≥4 mm) and positive BOP was reduced by AB from 961 to 377, and by PDT from 628 to 394. Pockets with PD ≥ 7 mm were reduced by AB from 141 to 7, and by PDT from 137 to 61. After 3 months, both treatments led to statistically significant clinical improvements. The systemic administration of antibiotics, however, resulted in significantly higher reduction of PD and a lower number of deep pockets compared to PDT.
Available from: Fabiano Cirano
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: AIM: To investigate the indication of systemic antimicrobial agents used by dental professionals for treatment of patients affected by periodontal diseases. METHODS: Interviews by a questionnaire were held with 225 professionals of different dental specialties and who performed periodontal treatment. RESULTS: Among interviewees, 94% indicated systemic antibiotics as a form of periodontal disease treatment. Their main indication was for periodontal abscesses (80%) followed by aggressive periodontitis (62%) and necrotizing diseases (45%). The most frequently used antibiotics were amoxicillin (81%) and metronidazole (57%). The medications were indicated in association with mechanical therapy by 67% of the professionals. As regards the occasion of indication, 60% indicated systemic antibiotic therapy before and after mechanical periodontal scaling and root planing. Seventy-eight percent of the professionals indicated antibiotics associated with periodontal surgery for access to scaling, and 76% indicated it before and after the surgical procedure. Among the interviewees, 99% took into account systemic involvement for drug administration. CONCLUSIONS: It was concluded that a considerable portion of professionals indicate systemic antibiotic-therapy in an incoherent manner and in situations in which there is no indication for antibiotic use, or with ineffective protocols.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Peri-implantitis is like Damocles sword, threatening over our final results as is the most common cause of implant failure. It is, was and will be one of the most challenging tasks for the practitioner to deal with. The rough implant surface offers the ideal conditions for the pathogenic bacteria to stick and multiply. Even more, the growing mature biofilm is harder to eliminate. Mechanical cleaning and rinsing is not capable to destroy it entirely. Most treatment protocols include strong antibiotics, disregarding their side effects and interactions with other medications.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The use of antibacterial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) additionally to scaling and root planing (SRP) has been shown to positively influence the clinical outcomes. However, at present, it is unknown to what extent aPDT may represent a potential alternative to the use of systemic antibiotics in nonsurgical periodontal therapy in patients with aggressive periodontitis (AP). The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes following nonsurgical periodontal therapy and additional use of either aPDT or amoxicillin and metronidazole (AB) in patients with AP.
Thirty-six patients with AP displaying at least three sites with pocket depth (PD) ≥6 mm were treated with SRP and either systemic administration of AB for 7 days or with two episodes of aPDT. The following clinical parameters were evaluated at baseline and at 6 months: plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BOP), PD, gingival recession (GR) and clinical attachment level (CAL).
Thirty-five patients have completed the 6-month evaluation. At 6 months, mean PD was statistically significantly reduced in both groups (from 5.0 ± 0.8 to 3.0 ± 0.6 mm with AB and from 5.1 ± 0.5 to 3.9 ± 0.8 mm with aPDT (p < 0.001)). AB yielded statistically significantly higher improvements in the primary outcome parameter PD (p < 0.001) when compared to aPDT. The number of pockets ≥7 mm was reduced from 141 to 3 after AB (p < 0.001) and from 137 to 45 after aPDT (p = 0.03). Both therapies resulted in statistically significant reductions in all parameters compared to baseline.
While both treatments resulted in statistically significant clinical improvements, AB showed statistically significantly higher PD reduction and lower number of pockets ≥7 mm compared to aPDT.
In patients with AP, the two times application of aPDT in conjunction with nonsurgical periodontal therapy cannot be considered an alternative to the systemic use of amoxicillin and metronidazole.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.