Photodiagnosis and photodynamic therapy · 2022
Is a single session of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy as an adjuvant to non-surgical scaling and root planing effective in reducing periodontal inflammation and subgingival presence of Porphyromonas gingivalis and Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans in patients with periodontitis?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Aabed Kawther, Moubayed Nadine, BinShabaib Munerah S, ALHarthi Shatha Subhi
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The aim was to assess the influence of a single session of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) as an adjunct to non-surgical scaling and root planing (SRP) in reducing periodontal inflammation and subgingival presence of Porphyromonas gingivalis (P. gingivalis) and Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans (A. actinomycetemcomitans) in patients with periodontitis.
METHODS: Patients diagnosed with periodontitis were included. Information regarding age and gender was recorded using a questionnaire. All patients underwent full mouth non-surgical SRP and the following parameters were assessed at baseline: (a) marginal bone loss (MBL); (b) probing depth (PD) (c) clinical attachment loss (CAL); and (d) presence of supra-and subgingival bleeding and plaque (GI and PI). Identification of A. actinomycetemcomitans and P. gingivalis was performed using polymerase chain reaction. For aPDT (test-group), methylene-blue (MB) (0.005%) was used as photosensitizer and it was applied over and inside the buccal pockets of teeth. Using a Diode laser at 660 nm and 150 mW, irradiation was performed All clinical parameters except for MBL and microbiological evaluations were re-assessed at 3-months of follow-up. Level of significance was set at P<0.05.
RESULTS: At 3-months of follow-up A. actinomycetemcomitans and P. gingivalis were identified in significantly lower number of patients in groups 1 and 2 compared with their respective baseline values. Number of patients in whom A. actinomycetemcomitans and P. gingivalis were identified at 3-months of follow-up were similar in both groups. At baseline, there was no statistically significant difference in PI, GI, PD, CAL and MBL among patients in groups 1 and 2. In groups 1 and 2, scores of PI (P<0.001), GI (P<0.001) and PD (P<0.001) were significantly higher at baseline compared with their respective 3-months' follow-up scores.
CONCLUSION: One application of aPDT with non-surgical SRP is ineffective in managing periodontal inflammation and presence of P. gingivalis and A. actinomycetemcomitans in periodontitis patients.
METHODS: Patients diagnosed with periodontitis were included. Information regarding age and gender was recorded using a questionnaire. All patients underwent full mouth non-surgical SRP and the following parameters were assessed at baseline: (a) marginal bone loss (MBL); (b) probing depth (PD) (c) clinical attachment loss (CAL); and (d) presence of supra-and subgingival bleeding and plaque (GI and PI). Identification of A. actinomycetemcomitans and P. gingivalis was performed using polymerase chain reaction. For aPDT (test-group), methylene-blue (MB) (0.005%) was used as photosensitizer and it was applied over and inside the buccal pockets of teeth. Using a Diode laser at 660 nm and 150 mW, irradiation was performed All clinical parameters except for MBL and microbiological evaluations were re-assessed at 3-months of follow-up. Level of significance was set at P<0.05.
RESULTS: At 3-months of follow-up A. actinomycetemcomitans and P. gingivalis were identified in significantly lower number of patients in groups 1 and 2 compared with their respective baseline values. Number of patients in whom A. actinomycetemcomitans and P. gingivalis were identified at 3-months of follow-up were similar in both groups. At baseline, there was no statistically significant difference in PI, GI, PD, CAL and MBL among patients in groups 1 and 2. In groups 1 and 2, scores of PI (P<0.001), GI (P<0.001) and PD (P<0.001) were significantly higher at baseline compared with their respective 3-months' follow-up scores.
CONCLUSION: One application of aPDT with non-surgical SRP is ineffective in managing periodontal inflammation and presence of P. gingivalis and A. actinomycetemcomitans in periodontitis patients.