RESUMEN
CONTEXT: Local administration of antimicrobial agents offer a "site-specific" approach to the periodontal therapy and it has several benefits. AIM: The present study was aimed to assess the clinical and microbial changes by subgingival irrigation using different subgingival irrigants in periodontitis patients and also to assess the mechanical effect of different local irrigation devices; if any. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: Split-mouth design was employed on ten individuals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study sample consisted of 10 individuals in whom full-mouth scaling and root planing was performed and subgingival irrigation therapy was instituted for an experimental period of 30 days. The clinical as well as microbiological parameters were evaluated. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: To calculate baseline data with day thirty data, paired t-test was used. Intergroup comparison was carried out using one-way ANOVA. Multiple comparisons among groups were carried out using post hoc Tamhane's T2 test. RESULTS: Among the different subgingival irrigants used, 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate is most effective followed by ozonated water, whereas saline was found to be ineffective when compared to the other two subgingival irrigants. Subgingival irrigation using pulsated device may not have any additive effect in alteration of the subgingival microflora. CONCLUSION: Within the limits and scope of the study, it can be safely concluded that 0.2% chlorhexidine may be used as an adjunct to mechanical therapy for achieving a significant reduction in inflammatory periodontal changes and also reduction in periodontopathogenic microflora.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: A high number of patients with periodontitis may have undiagnosed diabetes. Self-monitoring devices provide a simple method for rapid monitoring of the glucose level in the blood by utilizing a blood sample from the finger, but this method requires a needle puncture to obtain blood. It is possible that gingival crevicular blood (GCB) from routine periodontal probing may be a source of blood for glucose measurements. AIM: To establish whether GCB can be used as a non-invasive diagnostic aid in screening for diabetes mellitus during routine periodontal examination. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study involved 50 diabetics and 50 non-diabetics, with an age range of 26-66 years. Both diabetic and non-diabetic patients had moderate to severe gingivitis with at least one tooth in the maxillary anterior region showing bleeding upon probing. The Gingival Index and Oral Hygiene Index-Simplified were recorded. Blood oozing from the gingival sulcus/pocket following periodontal pocket probing was collected using a capillary tube and transferred to the test stick of a glucose self-monitoring device (Accu-Chek, Roche Diagnostic, Germany) in patients with comparable gingival and oral hygiene status. This value was compared with the peripheral fingerstick blood glucose (PFBG) value, which was obtained by pricking the finger tip at the same visit. Statistical analysis was performed using Pearson's correlation coefficient. RESULT: There was no statistically significant difference between the gingival crevicular blood glucose (GCBG) values and the PFBG values in both the diabetic (P = 0.129, NS) and the non-diabetic (P = 0.503, NS) groups. Karl Pearson's product-moment correlation coefficient was calculated, which showed a positive correlation between the two measurements in the diabetic (r = 0.943) as well as the non-diabetic (r = 0.926) groups. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that GCB can be used as a non-invasive diagnostic aid in screening for diabetes mellitus during routine periodontal examination.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to evaluate the relationship between obesity and periodontitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 300 subjects aged 20 years and above suffering from generalized periodontitis were recruited from Department of Periodontics, Pacific Dental College and Hospital, Udaipur. Periodontal status of the subjects was recorded. Body mass index and waist circumference were used as measure to assess obesity. Other variables like age, gender, oral hygiene index were also recorded. RESULTS: When evaluation was done for prevalence of periodontal disease according to BMI in obese and non-obese, the prevalence of periodontal disease was significantly (P=0.03) more in obese (88%) than in non-obese (74.4%) individuals. [OR=-20.4 and 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3-1.3]. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of periodontal disease is higher among obese subjects. Obesity could be a potential risk factor for periodontal disease in all age groups.