Journal of periodontology · 2000
The effect of locally delivered controlled-release doxycycline or scaling and root planing on periodontal maintenance patients over 9 months.
Клиническое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Garrett S, Adams D F, Bogle G, Donly K, Drisko C H, Hallmon W W, Hancock E B, Hanes P, Hawley C E, Johnson L, Kiger R, Killoy W, Mellonig J T, Raab F J, Ryder M, Stoller N, Polson A, Wang H L, Wolinsky L E, Yukna R A, Harrold C Q, Hill M, Johnson V B, Soouthard G L
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: This research report evaluates clinical changes resulting from local delivery of doxycycline hyclate (DH) or traditional scaling and root planing (SRP) in a group of patients undergoing supportive periodontal therapy (SPT).
METHODS: In all, 141 patients received either DH (67) or SRP (74) treatment in sites > or =5 mm on one-half of their dentition at baseline and month 4.
RESULTS: Clinical results were determined at month 9. Baseline mean probing depth recordings were similar between the two groups (DH = 5.9 mm; SRP = 5.9 mm). Mean month 9 results showed similar clinical results for attachment level gain (DH 0.7 mm; SRP 0.8 mm) and probing depth reduction (DH 1.3 mm; SRP 1.1 mm). Percentage of sites showing > or =2 mm attachment level gain at month 9 was 24.7% in the DH group and 21.2% in the SRP group. Thirty-nine percent (39%) of DH sites and 38% of SRP sites showed > or =2 mm probing depth reduction. When treated sides of the dentition were compared to untreated sides, DH showed a difference in disease activity (> or =2 mm attachment loss) from 19.3% (untreated) to 7.2% (treated); and SRP from 14.3% (untreated) to 8.1% (treated).
CONCLUSIONS: Results show that both DH without concomitant mechanical instrumentation and SRP were equally effective as SPT in this patient group over the 9-month study period.
METHODS: In all, 141 patients received either DH (67) or SRP (74) treatment in sites > or =5 mm on one-half of their dentition at baseline and month 4.
RESULTS: Clinical results were determined at month 9. Baseline mean probing depth recordings were similar between the two groups (DH = 5.9 mm; SRP = 5.9 mm). Mean month 9 results showed similar clinical results for attachment level gain (DH 0.7 mm; SRP 0.8 mm) and probing depth reduction (DH 1.3 mm; SRP 1.1 mm). Percentage of sites showing > or =2 mm attachment level gain at month 9 was 24.7% in the DH group and 21.2% in the SRP group. Thirty-nine percent (39%) of DH sites and 38% of SRP sites showed > or =2 mm probing depth reduction. When treated sides of the dentition were compared to untreated sides, DH showed a difference in disease activity (> or =2 mm attachment loss) from 19.3% (untreated) to 7.2% (treated); and SRP from 14.3% (untreated) to 8.1% (treated).
CONCLUSIONS: Results show that both DH without concomitant mechanical instrumentation and SRP were equally effective as SPT in this patient group over the 9-month study period.