Air powder waterjet technology using erythritol or glycine powders in periodontal or peri-implant prophylaxis and therapy: A consensus report of an expert meeting.

OBJECTIVES: To attain a collective expert opinion on the use of air powder waterjet technology (APWT) with erythritol and glycine powders in the prophylaxis and therapy of periodontal and peri-implant diseases. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In the first step, a modified one-round online Delphi survey including 44 five-point Likert scale questions was conducted among a group of 10 expert clinicians and researchers with thorough knowledge and experience in this topic. In the second step, the single questions and the survey results were discussed during a meeting, and consensus statements were formulated, respectively. RESULTS: An agreement was reached on most items, especially opinions supporting glycine and erythritol powders as favorable with respect to efficiency, safety, and comfort. More scientific evidence is needed to support the improvement in clinical attachment on teeth and implants, especially when APWT with erythritol is used. In addition, APWT needs more long-term evaluation and studies in terms of microbiome/microbiological effects as well as effects on the inflammatory response on natural teeth and implants, also in light of a guided biofilm therapy concept. CONCLUSIONS: In line with the expert opinions and supported by the evidence, it was concluded that the use of APWT with erythritol and glycine powders in nonsurgical periodontal and peri-implant therapy and prophylaxis is patient compliant and efficient.

Microbial Sampling Using Interdental Brushes and Paper Points around Teeth and Implants: A Pilot Study for Comparison.

Inflammatory periodontal and peri-implant diseases follow dysbiotic shifts in a susceptible host. A well-established tool for microbial sample collection is the use of paper points. The purpose of this pilot study was to evaluate the use of interdental brushes compared to paper points. Biofilm samples were collected with paper points and later interdental brushes from ten patients. Five patients were represented with a community periodontal index of treatment needs (CPITN) of 0-2 around the teeth and an implant with PPD ≤ 5 mm and no radiological bone loss. The remaining five patients had a CPITN ≥ 3 and one implant with peri-implantitis. Microbial samples were analyzed with quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) and next-generation sequencing (NGS). The results showed higher amounts of DNA in samples taken by interdental brushes but also higher Ct values. Both methods detected Filifactor alocis, Porphyromonas gingivalis, Prevotella intermedia, Tannerella forsythia, and Treponema denticola in the majority of samples, while Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans was rarely found. A microbial dysbiosis index showed comparable or higher values in sites with no periodontitis/peri-implantitis with interdental brushes. The results of this pilot study indicate that interdental brushes might be a valid technique for microbial sampling and particularly advantageous in the early detection of dysbiotic shifts around teeth and implants. Larger studies with more participants are needed to validate the proposed microbial sampling method with interdental brushes.