Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology · 2011
The comparative evaluation of xanthan gel with chlorhexidine (Chlosite) in smokers and non-smokers: A clinical and microbiological assessment.
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.
Chandra Chetan, Valavalkar Narayan, Vandana K L
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Prevention of the periodontal disease progression is the primary goal of periodontal therapy. When conventional therapy is found inadequate to attain periodontal health in chronic periodontitis, local antimicrobial agents have been used as an adjunct with scaling and root planning (SRP) which has reproduced encouraging results. Hence, this study was undertaken to evaluate the new sustained released local drug Chlosite clinically and microbiologically in smokers and non-smokers.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The patients were grouped into experimental group A treated with SRP plus Chlosite (SRP + CHL), experimental group B treated with Chlosite alone (CHL), and control group C treated only with SRP alone. A total number of 141 sites from six patients (67 sites from three non-smoker patients and 74 sites from three smoker patients) participated in this study. The clinical parameters, Plaque index (PI), Gingival index (GI), Bleeding index (BI), and Relative attachment level (RAL), were recorded and subgingival plaque samples were collected and subjected to microbiological analysis.
RESULTS: On comparison of smokers and non-smokers, in SRP group, non-smokers showed a higher reduction in BI and GI and smokers showed a higher reduction in PI. There was no significant gain in RAL of both smokers and non-smokers. In SRP + CHL group, non-smokers showed a higher reduction in relation to BI and GI and smokers showed a higher reduction in relation to PI. There was no significant gain in RAL of both smokers and non-smokers. In CHL group, both smokers and non-smokers showed a nonsignificant reduction in BI, GI, and RAL, but smokers showed a significant reduction in PI as compared with non-smokers. All the groups showed reduction in the microbial count of Fusobacterium nucleatum, Porphyromonas gingivalis, and Tannerella forsythia which were found to be statistically not significant when it was compared between non-smokers and smokers.
INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSION: In this study, all treatment groups were found to be efficacious in the treatment of periodontal disease as demonstrated by improvement in PI, GI, BI, and RAL. Combination of SRP and Chlosite resulted in added benefits compared with the two treatment groups.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The patients were grouped into experimental group A treated with SRP plus Chlosite (SRP + CHL), experimental group B treated with Chlosite alone (CHL), and control group C treated only with SRP alone. A total number of 141 sites from six patients (67 sites from three non-smoker patients and 74 sites from three smoker patients) participated in this study. The clinical parameters, Plaque index (PI), Gingival index (GI), Bleeding index (BI), and Relative attachment level (RAL), were recorded and subgingival plaque samples were collected and subjected to microbiological analysis.
RESULTS: On comparison of smokers and non-smokers, in SRP group, non-smokers showed a higher reduction in BI and GI and smokers showed a higher reduction in PI. There was no significant gain in RAL of both smokers and non-smokers. In SRP + CHL group, non-smokers showed a higher reduction in relation to BI and GI and smokers showed a higher reduction in relation to PI. There was no significant gain in RAL of both smokers and non-smokers. In CHL group, both smokers and non-smokers showed a nonsignificant reduction in BI, GI, and RAL, but smokers showed a significant reduction in PI as compared with non-smokers. All the groups showed reduction in the microbial count of Fusobacterium nucleatum, Porphyromonas gingivalis, and Tannerella forsythia which were found to be statistically not significant when it was compared between non-smokers and smokers.
INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSION: In this study, all treatment groups were found to be efficacious in the treatment of periodontal disease as demonstrated by improvement in PI, GI, BI, and RAL. Combination of SRP and Chlosite resulted in added benefits compared with the two treatment groups.