Analysis of the periodontal status of patients with mandibular-bonded retainers

PURPOSE: This clinical study evaluated the periodontal status of patients with bonded retainers as compared to a non-treated control group. METHODS: Forty dental students were included in the sample and divided into the following two groups: 1) a test group of 20 subjects that, after orthodontic treatment, have been bonded retainer users for at least 2 years and 2) a control group of 20 patients that never experienced orthodontic treatment nor used any bonded retainer. The region associated with the retainer in the test group and the lower canine-to-canine region in the control group were examined according to the following clinical parameters: plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BOP), gingival recession (GR), clinical attachment level (CAL) and probing depth (PD). RESULTS: No differences were observed for GR or BOP (P>0.05). In contrast, the test group showed higher values of CAL and PD at proximal sites when compared to controls (P<0.05). In addition, IP was significantly increased at buccal and lingual sites (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: The placement of orthodontic bonded retainers negatively affected periodontal health, resulting in increased PI, PD and CAL.

Laser Phototherapy as Topical Prophylaxis Against Head and Neck Cancer Radiotherapy-Induced Oral Mucositis: Comparison Between Low and High/Low Power Lasers

Background and Objective: Oral mucositis is a dose-limiting and painful side effect of radiotherapy (RT) and/or chemotherapy in cancer patients. The purpose of the present study was to analyze the effect of different protocols of laser phototherapy (LPT) on the grade of mucositis and degree of pain in patients under RT. Patients and Methods: Thirty-nine patients were divided into three groups: G1, where the irradiations were done three times a week using low power laser; G2, where combined high and low power lasers were used three time a week; and G3, where patients received low power laser irradiation once a week. The low power LPT was done using an InGaAlP laser (660 nm/40 mW/6 J cm(-2)/0.24 J per point). In the combined protocol, the high power LPT was done using a GaAlAs laser (808 nm, 1 W/cm(2)). Oral mucositis was assessed at each LPT session in accordance to the oral-mucositis scale of the National Institute of the Cancer-Common Toxicity criteria (NIC-CTC). The patient self-assessed pain was measured by means of the visual analogue scale. Results: All protocols of LPT led to the maintenance of oral mucositis scores in the same levels until the last RT session. Moreover, LPT three times a week also maintained the pain levels. However, the patients submitted to the once a week LPT had significant pain increase; and the association of low/high LPT led to increased healing time. Conclusions: These findings are desired when dealing with oncologic patients under RT avoiding unplanned radiation treatment breaks and additional hospital costs. Lasers Surg.Med. 41:264-270,2009. (C) 2009Wiley-Liss, Inc.