Microbiologic results after non-surgical erbium-doped:yttrium, aluminum, and garnet laser or air-abrasive treatment of peri-implantitis: a randomized clinical trial

The purpose of this study is to assess clinical and microbiologic effects of the non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis lesions using either an erbium-doped:yttrium, aluminum, and garnet (Er:YAG) laser or an air-abrasive subgingival polishing method.

In vitro evaluation of surface roughness, adhesion of periodontal ligament fibroblasts, and Streptococcus gordonii following root instrumentation with Gracey curettes and subsequent polishing with diamond-coated curettes

OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to evaluate the efficacy of an additional usage of a diamond-coated curette on surface roughness, adhesion of periodontal ligament (PDL) fibroblasts, and of Streptococcus gordonii in vitro. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Test specimens were prepared from extracted teeth and exposed to instrumentation with conventional Gracey curettes with or without additional use of diamond-coated curettes. Surface roughness (Ra and Rz) was measured before and following treatment. In addition, the adhesion of PDL fibroblasts for 72 h and adhesion of S. gordonii ATCC 10558 for 2 h have been determined. RESULTS: Instrumentation with conventional Gracey curettes reduced surface roughness (median Ra before: 0.36 μm/after: 0.25 μm; p < 0.001; median Rz before: 2.34 μm/after: 1.61 μm; p < 0.001). The subsequent instrumentation with the diamond-coated curettes resulted in a median Ra of 0.31 μm/Rz of 2.06 μm (no significance in comparison to controls). The number of attached PDL fibroblasts did not change following scaling with Gracey curettes. The additional instrumentation with the diamond-coated curettes resulted in a two-fold increase in the number of attached PDL fibroblasts but not in the numbers of adhered bacteria. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of root surfaces with conventional Gracey curettes followed by subsequent polishing with diamond-coated curettes may result in a root surface which provides favorable conditions for the attachment of PDL fibroblasts without enhancing microbial adhesion. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The improved attachment of PDL fibroblasts and the limited microbial adhesion on root surfaces treated with scaling with conventional Gracey curettes followed by subsequent polishing with diamond-coated curettes may favor periodontal wound healing.

Clinical outcomes following subgingival application of a novel erythritol powder by means of air polishing in supportive periodontal therapy: a randomized, controlled clinical study

OBJECTIVES The aim of this prospective, randomized, controlled clinical study was to compare the clinical outcomes of the subgingival treatment with erythritol powder by means of an air-polishing (EPAP) device and of scaling and root planing (SRP) during supportive periodontal therapy (SPT). METHOD AND MATERIALS 40 patients enrolled in SPT were randomly assigned to two groups of equal size. Sites had to show signs of inflammation (bleeding on probing [BOP]-positive) and a probing pocket depth (PPD) of ≥ 4 mm, however, without presence of detectable subgingival calculus. During SPT, these sites were treated with EPAP or SRP, respectively. Full mouth and site-specific plaque indices, BOP, PPD, and clinical attachment level (CAL) were recorded at baseline (BL) and at 3 months, whereas the percentage of study sites positive for BOP (BOP+) was considered as primary outcome variable. Additionally, patient comfort using a visual analog scale (VAS) and the time needed to treat per site was evaluated. RESULTS At 3 months, mean BOP level measured 45.1% at test sites and 50.6% at control sites, respectively, without a statistically significant difference between the groups (P > .05). PPD and CAL slightly improved for both groups with comparable mean values at 3 months. Evaluation of patient tolerance showed statistically significantly better values among patients receiving the test treatment (mean VAS [0-10], 1.51) compared to SRP (mean VAS [0-10], 3.66; P = .0012). The treatment of test sites was set to 5 seconds per site. The treatment of control sites, on the other hand, lasted 85 seconds on average. CONCLUSION The new erythritol powder applied with an air-polishing device can be considered a promising modality for repeated instrumentation of residual pockets during SPT. CLINICAL RELEVANCE With regard to clinical outcomes during SPT, similar results can be expected irrespective of the two treatment approaches of hand instrumentation or subgingival application of erythritol powder with an air-polishing device in sites where only biofilm removal is required.

A Biofilm Pocket Model to Evaluate Different Non-Surgical Periodontal Treatment Modalities in Terms of Biofilm Removal and Reformation, Surface Alterations and Attachment of Periodontal Ligament Fibroblasts.

BACKGROUND AND AIM There is a lack of suitable in vitro models to evaluate various treatment modalities intending to remove subgingival bacterial biofilm. Consequently, the aims of this in vitro-study were: a) to establish a pocket model enabling mechanical removal of biofilm and b) to evaluate repeated non-surgical periodontal treatment with respect to biofilm removal and reformation, surface alterations, tooth hard-substance-loss, and attachment of periodontal ligament (PDL) fibroblasts. MATERIAL AND METHODS Standardized human dentin specimens were colonized by multi-species biofilms for 3.5 days and subsequently placed into artificially created pockets. Non-surgical periodontal treatment was performed as follows: a) hand-instrumentation with curettes (CUR), b) ultrasonication (US), c) subgingival air-polishing using erythritol (EAP) and d) subgingival air-polishing using erythritol combined with chlorhexidine digluconate (EAP-CHX). The reduction and recolonization of bacterial counts, surface roughness (Ra and Rz), the caused tooth substance-loss (thickness) as well as the attachment of PDL fibroblasts were evaluated and statistically analyzed by means of ANOVA with Post-Hoc LSD. RESULTS After 5 treatments, bacterial reduction in biofilms was highest when applying EAP-CHX (4 log10). The lowest reduction was found after CUR (2 log10). Additionally, substance-loss was the highest when using CUR (128±40 µm) in comparison with US (14±12 µm), EAP (6±7 µm) and EAP-CHX (11±10) µm). Surface was roughened when using CUR and US. Surfaces exposed to US and to EAP attracted the highest numbers of PDL fibroblasts. CONCLUSION The established biofilm model simulating a periodontal pocket combined with interchangeable placements of test specimens with multi-species biofilms enables the evaluation of different non-surgical treatment modalities on biofilm removal and surface alterations. Compared to hand instrumentation the application of ultrasonication and of air-polishing with erythritol prevents from substance-loss and results in a smooth surface with nearly no residual biofilm that promotes the reattachment of PDL fibroblasts.

The effects of erythritol air-polishing powder on microbiologic and clinical outcomes during supportive periodontal therapy: Six-month results of a randomized controlled clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES To characterize the physical characteristics of a new low abrasive erythritol powder (EPAP) and to evaluate its influence on the clinical and microbiologic parameters over a period of 6 months in patients undergoing supportive periodontal therapy (SPT). METHOD AND MATERIALS Prior to the clinical application, the particle size and abrasion level of EPAP were compared to glycine air-polishing powder (GPAP) ex vivo. Subsequently, 40 chronic periodontitis patients previously enrolled in SPT were randomly assigned into two groups for the treatment with subgingival EPAP or repeated scaling and root planing (SRP). At baseline (BL), bleeding on probing positive (BOP+) sites with probing pocket depth (PPD) of ≥ 4 mm but no detectable calculus were defined as study sites. During SPT, these sites were either treated by EPAP or SRP at BL, 3, and 6 months (3M, 6M). When indicated, additional SRP was provided. Plaque Index, BOP, PPD, clinical attachment level (CAL), and subgingival plaque were evaluated at BL and 6M. RESULTS EPAP yielded lower abrasiveness and smaller particle sizes when compared to GPAP. In 38 patients completing the study, EPAP and SRP resulted in significant reductions of BOP% (EPAP, 40.45%; SRP, 42.53%), PPD (EPAP, -0.67; SRP, -0.68), and increase of CAL (EPAP, 0.48; SRP, 0.61) while at 6M no statistically significant between-group differences were observed (P > .05). Microbiologic evaluation revealed minor shifts in the composition of the subgingival biofilm without influence on periodontopathogenic bacteria. CONCLUSION The subgingival use of EPAP by means of an air-polishing device may be considered safe and may lead to comparable clinical and microbiologic outcomes to those obtained with SRP. CLINICAL RELEVANCE The subgingival use of EPAP appears to represent a promising modality for the removal of subgingival biofilm during SPT.