Comparison of clinical outcomes following treatment of chronic adult periodontitis with subgingival scaling or subgingival scaling plus metronidazolegel

Citation
Gs. Griffiths et al., Comparison of clinical outcomes following treatment of chronic adult periodontitis with subgingival scaling or subgingival scaling plus metronidazolegel, J CLIN PER, 27(12), 2000, pp. 910-917
Citations number
25
Categorie Soggetti
Dentistry/Oral Surgery & Medicine","da verificare
Journal title
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY
ISSN journal
03036979 → ACNP
Volume
27
Issue
12
Year of publication
2000
Pages
910 - 917
Database
ISI
SICI code
0303-6979(200012)27:12<910:COCOFT>2.0.ZU;2-4
Abstract
Background, aims: Conventional treatment of chronic periodontitis involves mechanical debridement of periodontal pockets. Recently, subgingival antimi crobials have been used adjunctively following such debridement. This 2-cen tre study compared the clinical effects of subgingival scaling (SRP) with S RP plus subgingival application of 25% metronidazole gel, Elyzol(R) (SRP+ge l), in patients with chronic adult periodontitis. Method: Voluntary informed written consent was obtained from 45 subjects at the Eastman (mean age 46, range 34-63) and 43 subjects at RAF Halton (mean age 47, range 34-71) who participated in this blind, randomised split-mout h design study. All had at least 2 sites in each quadrant with probing pock et depth (PPD) greater than or equal to5 mm. PPD bleeding on probing (BOP), and clinical probing attachment levels (CAL) measured using a stent, were recorded at baseline and at 1, 3, 6 and 9 months posttherapy. After subging ival scaling of all quadrants, 2 quadrants were randomly selected to be tre ated with metronidazole gel. Results: A paired t-test on baseline values showed no bias between groups. Both treatments effectively reduced the signs of periodontitis. At each fol low-up visit, reduction in PPD, CAL and BOP after the combined treatment wa s greater than for SRP alone. Paired t-tests showed that the improvement in the SRP+gel group was statistically significantly better (p<0.001) than fo r SRP alone (mean 0.5+/-0.6 mm. 95% CI0.4-0.6 mm.) Similarly, the % of site s which improved to a final pocket depth of 43 mm and the % of sites which improved over the 9 months of the study by as much as <greater than or equa l to>2 mm were greater for SRP+gel than for SRP alone. Conclusions: At the end of the study, the mean reductions for PPD were 1.0 mm (SRP) compared to 1.5 mm (SRP+gel), and for CAL they were 0.4 mm (SRP) c ompared to 0.8 mm (SRP+gel), with mean difference for CAL between treatment s of 0.4+/-0.6 mm (95% confidence intervals of 0.3-0.6 mm). The combination therapy of SRP+gel was superior to the conventional treatment of SRP alone , and these differences were maintained for 9 months.