Evaluation of Turmeric Chip Compared with Chlorhexidine Chip as a Local Drug Delivery Agent in the Treatment of Chronic Periodontitis: A Split Mouth Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the effect of chlorhexidine (CHX) chip and turmeric chip as a local drug delivery (LDD) agent in the treatment of patients with chronic periodontitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 120 sites with pocket depths 5-8 mm were chosen as a split mouth design at 3 sites in the same patient. Selected sites were randomly divided into three groups to receive CHX chip in addition to scaling and root planing (SRP) in group A, turmeric chip in addition to SRP in group B, and SRP only in group C. Clinical parameters, that is, plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), probing pocket depth (PPD), and relative attachment level (RAL) were recorded at baseline, 1 month, and 3 months interval. RESULT: On applying statistical analysis, results revealed that there was a significant reduction in all the clinical parameters, that is, PI, GI, PPD, and gain in RAL from baseline to 1 month and 3 months in all the three groups. These results were found to be significantly high in the CHX group and turmeric group than in the SRP group. Also, the results in both the test groups were maintained till the end of the study periods, but SRP group showed a significant deterioration after 1 month as was seen by increase in PPD and decrease in RAL scores after 3 months in the SRP group. CONCLUSION: Both the treatment modalities with the application of LDD as an adjunct to SRP proved to be equally beneficial in the treatment of chronic periodontitis.

Comparison of semilunar coronally repositioned flap with gingival massaging using an Ayurvedic product (irimedadi taila) in the treatment of class-I gingival recession: A clinical study.

AIM: To study the comparison in terms of root coverage the effect of gingival massaging using an ayurvedic product and semilunar coronally repositioned flap (SCRF) to assess the treatment outcomes in the management of Miller's class I gingival recessions over a-6 mo period. METHODS: The present study comprised of total of 90 sites of Miller's class-I gingival recessions in the maxillary anteriors, the sites were divided into three groups each comprising 30 sites, Group I-were treated by massaging using a Placebo (Ghee) Group II-were treated by massaging using an ayurvedic product (irimedadi taila). Group III-were treated by SCRF. Clinical parameters assessed included recession height, recession width, probing pocket depth, width of attached gingiva, clinical attachment level and thickness of keratinized tissue. Clinical recordings were performed at baseline and 6 mo later. The results were analyzed to determine improvements in the clinical parameters. The comparison was done using Wilcoxon signed rank test. The overall differences in the clinical improvements between the three groups was done using Kruskal-Wallis test. The probability value (P-value) of less than 0.01 was considered as statistically significant. RESULTS: Non-surgical periodontal therapy and gingival massaging improves facial gingival recessions and prevents further progression of mucogingival defects. Root coverage was achieved in both the experimental groups. The SCRF group proved to be superior in terms of all the clinical parameters. CONCLUSION: Root coverage is significantly better with semilunar coronally repositioned flap compared with the gingival massaging technique in the treatment of shallow maxillary Miller class I gingival recession defects.