Option-3 median measurement scheme in outlier reduction

Local delivery of chlorhexidine gluconate (PerioChip) in periodontal maintenance patients

AIM

The aim of this randomised, split-mouth, single-blind study was to determine the efficacy of controlled-release delivery of chlorhexidine gluconate 2.5 mg (PerioChip) in patients with residual bleeding pockets (>5 mm) at least 3 months following oral hygiene and root debridement phase therapy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

26 patients (non-smokers) were screened and potential study sites identified. Clinical parameters recorded at baseline and all subsequent visits were plaque index (PI), pocket probing depth (PPD), bleeding index (BI) and clinical attachment level (CAL). All study sites were debrided using ultrasonic instrumentation. PerioChips (PC) were placed in the selected sites of two quadrants (left or right) whilst identified sites in the remaining quadrants were left without adjunctive antimicrobial treatment. Clinical measurements were made at follow-up visits after 1, 3 and 6 months. Mean changes from baseline in PPD, BI and CAL were calculated with the patient as the experimental unit and comparability between the treatments was determined using t-tests.

RESULTS

At baseline there were no significant differences between PC and control sites for mean PI, PD, BI or CAL. The mean (SE) reductions in PPD for PC and control treatments were: 0.47 (0.1), 0.46 (0.1); 0.76 (0.1), 0.55 (0.1); 0.78 (0.1), 0.45 (0.1) for months 1, 3 and 6 respectively. Only at month 6 did the difference between treatments approach statistical significance (p=0.06). Mean (SE) reductions in CAL over the same periods were: 0.17 (0.1), 0.04 (0.08); 0.38 (0.1), 0.21 (0.1); 0.43 (0.1), 0.15 (0.09) p=0.048. Mean (SE) reduction in BI between PC and control treatments only reached statistical significance at 6 months: 1.08 (0.1), 0.59 (0.1) p=0.05.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that PerioChip is beneficial for patients on maintenance therapy although the benefit is not apparent until 6 months after placement.

Progression and treatment of chronic adult periodontitis

BACKGROUND

The periodontal status of 41 medically healthy adults with untreated chronic periodontitis was monitored before and after scaling and root planing (SRP).

METHODS

During a 6-month pretreatment phase, clinical measurements, digital subtraction radiography (DSR) analysis of alveolar bone, and measurement of gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) levels were undertaken. SRP was provided during a 1-month treatment phase. Clinical, radiographic, and biochemical analyses were repeated in a 6-month post-treatment healing period.

RESULTS

Pretreatment: no clinically significant changes in mean plaque indices (PI), probing depths (PD), bleeding on probing (BOP), or relative clinical attachment levels (CAL) were detected (P>0.05). DSR revealed small but statistically significant bone height (0.04 mm) and mass (0.97 mg) loss (P<0.001). GCF PGE2 levels gradually increased from 38.8 ng/ml at month 1 to 79.4 ng/ml at month 6. Post-treatment: statistically and clinically significant reductions were observed in mean PI, BOP, and PD (P<0.05). A statistically significant reduction in CAL was noted (P<0.05). The trend towards progressive bone loss was halted and reversed, and a statistically significant decrease in GCF PGE2 concentrations was detected (P<0.001). Smokers, non-smokers, and ex-smokers did not differ significantly in PI, BOP, CAL, radiographic, or biochemical parameters at any time. Mean PD was significantly greater in current smokers than in non- and ex-smokers (P<0.005). PD reduced comparably in all 3 smoking subgroups following treatment (P<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Conventional clinical measurements failed to identify disease progression over a 6-month period. Significant improvements were observed in clinical parameters after SRP, and a trend towards progressive bone loss was halted and reversed. Regular and frequent maintenance visits are important following treatment to maintain improvements in clinical parameters. Smokers had deeper probing depths than non- and ex-smokers, but pockets were reduced significantly and comparably in all 3 smoking subgroups following efficacious treatment.