Mechanical and chemical plaque control in the simultaneous management of gingivitis and caries: a systematic review.

AIM: To report the evidence on the effect of mechanical and/or chemical plaque control in the simultaneous management of gingivitis and caries. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A protocol was designed to identify randomized (RCTs) and controlled (CCTs) clinical trials, cohort studies and prospective case series (PCS), with at least 6 months of follow-up, reporting on plaque, gingivitis and caries. Relevant information was extracted from full papers, including quality and risk of bias. Meta-analyses were performed whenever possible. RESULTS: After the screening of 1,373 titles, 15 RCTs, 10 CCTs and 2 PCS were included. Low to moderate evidence support that combined professional and self-performed mechanical plaque control significantly reduces standardized plaque index [n = 4; weighted mean difference (WMD) = 1.294; 95% CI (0.445; 2.144); p = 0.003] and gingivitis scores [n = 4; WMD = 1.728; 95% CI (0.631; 2.825); p = 0.002]. The addition of fluoride to mechanical plaque control is relevant for caries management [n = 5; WMD = 1.159; 95% CI (0.145; 2.172); p = 0.025] while chlorhexidine rinses are relevant for gingivitis. CONCLUSION: Mechanical plaque control procedures are effective in reducing plaque and gingivitis. The addition of fluoride to mechanical plaque control is significant for caries management. Chlorhexidine rinse has a positive effect on gingivitis and inconclusive role in caries.

A systematic review on the effects of local antimicrobials as adjuncts to subgingival debridement, compared with subgingival debridement alone, in the treatment of chronic periodontitis.

AIMS: To update the existing scientific evidence on the efficacy of local antimicrobials as adjuncts to subgingival debridement in the treatment of chronic periodontitis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty-six papers were selected, reporting data from 52 different investigations. All the studies reported changes in probing pocket depth (PPD) and clinical attachment level (CAL) and most in plaque index (PlI) and/or bleeding on probing (BOP). Meta-analyses were performed with the data retrieved from the studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: The overall effect of the subgingival application of antimicrobials was statistically significant (p = 0.000) for both changes in PPD and CAL with a weighted mean difference (WMD) of -0.407 and -0.310 mm respectively. No significant differences occurred for changes in BOP and PlI. Subgingival application of tetracycline fibres, sustained released doxycycline and minocycline demonstrated a significant benefit in PPD reduction (WMD between 0.5 and 0.7 mm). The rest of the tested outcomes demonstrated a high heterogeneity. The local application of chlorhexidine and metronidazole showed a minimal effect when compared with placebo (WMD between 0.1 and 0.4 mm). CONCLUSIONS: The scientific evidence supports the adjunctive use of local antimicrobials to debridement in deep or recurrent periodontal sites, mostly when using vehicles with proven sustained release of the antimicrobial.

Surgical protocols for early implant placement in post-extraction sockets: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the best timing for placing implants after tooth extraction, by comparing early vs. delayed implant placement and evaluating the hard and/or soft tissue ridge dimensional changes and the outcomes related with implant survival and prosthesis success. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An online search of the main databases including The National Library of Medicine (MEDLINE via Pubmed), Embase and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted up to February 2011. Randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs), prospective cohort studies and case-control retrospective studies, with a follow-up of at least 1 month after loading of dental implants, comparing: (i) early vs. delayed implant placement, (ii) augmentation vs. no augmentation at implant placement in early placed implants and/or (iii) the comparison of various augmentation procedures at early implant placement, were conducted. A hand search of relevant journals was also performed. Screening of eligible studies, assessment of their methodological quality and data extraction were conducted in duplicate by two independent reviewers. Authors of studies were contacted for clarification or missing information. RESULTS: Eight studies were included, although meta-analysis could only be performed with the data from two studies comparing early vs. delayed implant. The percentage of bone height and bone width reduction favoured the early placement, with pooled mean difference between groups of 13.11% (95% CI: from 3.83 to 22.4; P = 0.057) and 19.85% (95% CI: from 13.85 to 25.81) respectively. Implant survival demonstrated a non-significant higher implant survival rate for the early group (RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.96-1.1).With regard to patient satisfaction, statistically significant differences between the groups in favour of the early group for overall satisfaction and appearance with the restoration were demonstrated at 2 years, although these differences were lost at 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Placement of dental implants at an early timing after tooth extraction may offer advantages in terms of soft and hard tissue preservation, when compared with a delayed protocol. Nevertheless, well-designed, high quality, randomized clinical trials, are needed, because the available evidence is today limited in terms of available studies and quality.