Journal of clinical periodontology · 2020
Adjunctive local treatments for patients with residual pockets during supportive periodontal care: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАСистематический обзорNetwork Meta-AnalysisНазвание 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.
Wang Chen-Ying, Yang Yu-Hao, Li Hua, Lin Ping-Yi, Su Yu-Ting, Kuo Mark Yen-Ping, Tu Yu-Kang
Аннотация
AIM: This systematic review and network meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of adjunctive locally delivered antimicrobials, compared to subgingival instrumentation alone or plus a placebo, on changes in probing pocket depth (PPD) and clinical attachment level (CAL), in patients with residual pockets during supportive periodontal care.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Literature search was performed with electronic databases and by hand until 31 May 2020. Primary outcome was the changes in PPD. The treatment effects between groups were estimated with weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and prediction intervals (PI) by using random-effects network meta-analysis.
RESULTS: Twenty-two studies were included. Significantly greater PPD reduction was achieved in chlorhexidine chip group (WMD: 0.65 mm, 95% CI: 0.21-1.10) and tetracycline fibre group (WMD: 0.64 mm, 95% CI: 0.20-1.08) over 6-month follow-up. Other adjunctive antimicrobial agents achieved non-significant improvements compared to scaling and root planing alone. All differences between adjunctive therapies were statistically non-significant. Similar findings were observed for CAL gain.
CONCLUSION: Adjunctive local antimicrobial agents achieved small additional PPD reduction and CAL gain in residual pockets for a follow-up of up to 6 months. Tetracycline fibre and chlorhexidine chip achieved better results than other antimicrobials.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Literature search was performed with electronic databases and by hand until 31 May 2020. Primary outcome was the changes in PPD. The treatment effects between groups were estimated with weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and prediction intervals (PI) by using random-effects network meta-analysis.
RESULTS: Twenty-two studies were included. Significantly greater PPD reduction was achieved in chlorhexidine chip group (WMD: 0.65 mm, 95% CI: 0.21-1.10) and tetracycline fibre group (WMD: 0.64 mm, 95% CI: 0.20-1.08) over 6-month follow-up. Other adjunctive antimicrobial agents achieved non-significant improvements compared to scaling and root planing alone. All differences between adjunctive therapies were statistically non-significant. Similar findings were observed for CAL gain.
CONCLUSION: Adjunctive local antimicrobial agents achieved small additional PPD reduction and CAL gain in residual pockets for a follow-up of up to 6 months. Tetracycline fibre and chlorhexidine chip achieved better results than other antimicrobials.