Journal of clinical periodontology · 2005
Open flap debridement with or without intentional cementum removal: a 4-month follow-up.
Клиническое исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Sallum Antonio Wilson, Alves Renato Vasconcelos, Damis Lúcio Flávio Teixeira, Bertolini Patricia Fernanda Roesler, Nociti Francisco Humberto, Sallum Enilson Antonio
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of cementum removal on periodontal repair.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty subjects with chronic periodontitis and presenting, at least, two proximal sites in anterior teeth (upper or lower) with probing depth > or =5 mm were selected. After oral hygiene instructions and ultrasonic supragingival instrumentation, the subjects were randomly assigned for one of the following groups: CIC, scaled with Gracey curettes; CIUS, scaled with ultrasonic device; CDC, calculus deattachment with Gracey curettes and brushing with saline solution; and CDUS, calculus deattachment with ultrasonic device and brushing with saline solution. Full-thickness flaps were reflected and the instrumentation was performed with a clinical microscope. Probing depth (PD), relative gingival margin level (RGML) and relative attachment level (RAL) were registered at five experimental periods: baseline and 30, 60, 90 and 120 days postoperative.
RESULTS: All the approaches were able to markedly reduce the PD values from the baseline to the other evaluation periods (p<0.0001). The increase in RGML values was statistically significant only for the CDUS group. There were no statistically significant differences between the baseline and postoperative values in all groups for the RAL changes. The changes in RAL were statistically significant only among the groups CDC and CDUS (p<0.0001).
CONCLUSION: The conventional scaling and root planing and the calculus deattachment were effective in reducing the probing depth values, regardless of the instrumentation method.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty subjects with chronic periodontitis and presenting, at least, two proximal sites in anterior teeth (upper or lower) with probing depth > or =5 mm were selected. After oral hygiene instructions and ultrasonic supragingival instrumentation, the subjects were randomly assigned for one of the following groups: CIC, scaled with Gracey curettes; CIUS, scaled with ultrasonic device; CDC, calculus deattachment with Gracey curettes and brushing with saline solution; and CDUS, calculus deattachment with ultrasonic device and brushing with saline solution. Full-thickness flaps were reflected and the instrumentation was performed with a clinical microscope. Probing depth (PD), relative gingival margin level (RGML) and relative attachment level (RAL) were registered at five experimental periods: baseline and 30, 60, 90 and 120 days postoperative.
RESULTS: All the approaches were able to markedly reduce the PD values from the baseline to the other evaluation periods (p<0.0001). The increase in RGML values was statistically significant only for the CDUS group. There were no statistically significant differences between the baseline and postoperative values in all groups for the RAL changes. The changes in RAL were statistically significant only among the groups CDC and CDUS (p<0.0001).
CONCLUSION: The conventional scaling and root planing and the calculus deattachment were effective in reducing the probing depth values, regardless of the instrumentation method.