Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Clinical outcomes of experimental gingivitis and peri-implant mucositis treatment with professionally administered plaque removal and photodynamic therapy.
Zeza, B; Farina, R; Pilloni, A; Mongardini, C.
Afiliação
  • Zeza B; Section of Periodontics, Department of Dentistry and Maxillofacial Surgery, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
  • Farina R; Research Centre for the Study of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.
  • Pilloni A; Operative Unit of Dentistry, University-Hospital of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.
  • Mongardini C; Section of Periodontics, Department of Dentistry and Maxillofacial Surgery, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Int J Dent Hyg ; 16(2): e58-e64, 2018 May.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28799232
ABSTRACT

AIM:

To comparatively evaluate the outcomes of professionally administered plaque removal (PAPR) and photodynamic therapy (PDT) in the treatment for experimentally induced gingivitis (G) and peri-implant mucositis (p-iM). MATERIALS AND

METHODS:

Twenty systemically healthy patients, each contributing a single implant-supported unit in a posterior sextant and a tooth within the same quadrant, were selected. Patients underwent an experimental G and p-iM trial consisting of a 2-week period of undisturbed plaque accumulation and a 6-week resolution phase following treatment administration. Supragingival plaque levels, probing depth (PD) and bleeding on probing (BoP) were recorded at experimental tooth and implant either before or 2 and 6 weeks after administration of PAPR+PDT.

RESULTS:

The results of the study indicate that (i) treatment with PAPR and PDT resulted in a significant reduction in the median number of BoP+ sites from 1 to 0 around teeth (P=.01) and from 3.5 to 2.0 around implants (P=.03), with the treatment effect being affected by initial PD; (ii) implants showed a significantly higher number of residual BoP+ sites following treatment, and the difference between implants and teeth was particularly pronounced (implants 42%; teeth 22%) at shallow (1-2 mm) sulci as observed at 6 weeks following treatment.

CONCLUSIONS:

G and p-iM can be effectively treated with PAPR+PDT. At shallow (1-2 mm) sulci, implants may show a higher number of residual bleeding sites when compared to teeth, and the number of residual bleeding sites following PAPR+PDT increases with increasing PD around either teeth or implants.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Fotoquimioterapia / Placa Dentária / Mucosite / Peri-Implantite / Gengivite Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials Limite: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Int J Dent Hyg Assunto da revista: ODONTOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Itália

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Fotoquimioterapia / Placa Dentária / Mucosite / Peri-Implantite / Gengivite Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials Limite: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Int J Dent Hyg Assunto da revista: ODONTOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Itália