The effect of chlorhexidine supplementation in a periodontal dressing

To Pack or Not to Pack: The Current Status of Periodontal Dressings

Surgical wound dressings have been employed over several centuries for the purpose of protection of surgical sites, to prevent postoperative infection and to accelerate healing. Periodontal dressings, also known as periodontal packs, provide similar benefits when applied after periodontal surgical procedures. They can broadly be categorized as eugenol-based dressings and noneugenol dressings. Over the years, many modifications have been made to the composition of such dressings to improve their physical and therapeutic properties. Controversies surrounding the rationale for their use, advantages and disadvantages of the most commonly employed periodontal dressings and their current status in clinical practice are described in this comprehensive review. From the evidence-based literature presented here, we have also attempted to answer the question of whether there is a universal need for the application of periodontal dressings.

Effect of periodontal dressing on non-surgical periodontal treatment outcomes: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Periodontal dressing has been advocated and showed some positive outcomes for placing over the surgical site after periodontal surgery. However, little is known about its effect on non-surgical therapy.

PURPOSE

The aim of this review was to assess the clinical effect of periodontal dressing when used after non-surgical therapy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Two examiners performed an electronic search in several databases for relevant articles published in English up to November 2013. Selected studies were randomized human clinical trials (prospective or retrospective trials) with the clear aim of investigating the effect of periodontal dressing placement upon periodontal non-surgical mechanical therapy. Data were extracted from the included articles for analysis.

RESULTS

Three randomized clinical trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria and thus were included in the data analysis. Statistical analysis could not be carried out due to the lack of clear data of the included studies. However, descriptive analysis showed its effectiveness in improving clinical parameters such as gain of clinical attachment level and reduction of probing pocket depth.

CONCLUSION

Placement of periodontal dressing right after non-surgical mechanical therapy can be beneficial in improving overall short-term clinical outcomes, although more controlled studies are still needed to validate this finding.

Light-cured resin "Barricaid" - An aesthetic and biocompatible dressing: A step ahead

BACKGROUND

Periodontal dressings have been used for several years as a protection over injured tissue to shield the area from further insult. Several dressings are commercially available. A recently introduced light-cured resin, claimed to be more biocompatible and esthetic, needs critical evaluation.

AIM

To compare this dressing with most widely used non-eugenol pack in the perspective of esthetics, acceptance, and healing following periodontal flap surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty patients suffering from generalized chronic periodontitis, requiring periodontal flap surgery on contralateral sides of the arch, were selected and divided randomly into Group I (control) and Group II (test). In Group I, a non-eugenol dressing and in Group II light-cured dressing were applied after flap surgery. Pain and discomfort scores were recorded on day 1, 2, and 3 while plaque scores, gingival index, and bleeding index were recorded on day 7. Patient's subjective evaluation and preference for the dressing material were recorded. The data was collected and statistically analyzed.

RESULTS

Group II showed better results than Group I when plaque scores, bleeding scores, modified gingival index scores, and pain and discomfort scores were compared though the differences were not statistically significant. Subjects found no unpleasant taste/smell and perceived the light-cured dressing to be better. A significantly higher number of patients preferred light-cured resin as a post-surgical dressing over Coe-pak.

CONCLUSION

The light-cured dressing showed better patient acceptability and proves to be a better alternative to Coe-pak as a dressing material.

Periodontal dressing: a review article

The purpose of this paper was to review the commercially available periodontal dressings, their physical and chemical properties, biocompatibility and therapeutic effects. Electronic search of scientific papers from 1956 to 2012 was carried out using PubMed, Scopus and Wiley InterScience search engines using the searched terms periodontal dressing, periodontal pack. Numerous in vitro and in vivo studies have evaluated various properties of periodontal dressings. Physical and chemical properties of dressings are directly related to their dimensional changes and adhesion properties. Their biocompatibility and therapeutic effect are among the other factors evaluated in the literature. Chlorhexidine is the most commonly used antibacterial agent in studies. In general, when comparing the advantages with the disadvantages, application of periodontal dressing seems to be beneficial. Numerous factors are involved in selection of an optimal dressing such as surgeon’s intention, required time for the dressing to remain on the surgery site and its dimensional changes.

Mini-implants in the anchorage armamentarium: new paradigms in the orthodontics

Paradigms have started to shift in the orthodontic world since the introduction of mini-implants in the anchorage armamentarium. Various forms of skeletal anchorage, including miniscrews and miniplates, have been reported in the literature. Recently, great emphasis has been placed on the miniscrew type of temporary anchorage device (TAD). These devices are small, are implanted with a relatively simple surgical procedure, and increase the potential for better orthodontic results. Therefore, miniscrews not only free orthodontists from anchorage-demanding cases, but they also enable clinicians to have good control over tooth movement in 3 dimensions. The miniplate type also produces significant improvements in treatment outcomes and has widened the spectrum of orthodontics. The purpose of this paper is to update clinicians on the current concepts and versatile uses and clinical applications of skeletal anchorage in orthodontics.

Effects of topically applied agents on intra-oral wound healing in a rat model: a clinical and histomorphometric study

OBJECTIVES

Topically applied chlorhexidine and hyaluronan have many studies supporting their use to enhance oral wound healing. Allantoin is widely used topically to promote epithelial proliferation and wound healing, with very little scientific evidence to support such uses. This study investigated and compared the influence of these agents on the healing of intra-oral excisional wounds with large epithelial and connective tissue defects.

METHODS

Excisional wounds, 3 mm in diameter, were made at the centre of the palate of 125 Wistar male albino rats. Five animals constituted the baseline group at time 0. The remaining animals were divided into four experimental and one control groups, in which chlorhexidine digluconate gel 0.2% (Perio.Kin®), hyaluronan gel (Gengigel®), allantoin 0.5% in vehicle gel, vehicle gel alone and nothing were applied daily to the wounds. The wound areas were measured photographically and the epithelialization rates were determined histologically at 0, 3, 7, 14 and 21 days post-surgery.

RESULTS

The mean wound area and mean distance between the epithelial margins decreased significantly with time in all experimental and control groups (P < 0.05). A significant rate of wound area reduction was observed following the use of Perio.Kin® and Gengigel® at 7 and 14 days. Perio.Kin® showed a significant rate of wound epithelialization at 7 days. Allantoin did not positively or negatively affect wound healing.

CONCLUSIONS

None of the tested agents had a negative effect on the rate of wound healing when applied on an excisional wound with epithelial and connective tissue defect. Positive results were achieved with Perio.Kin® and Gengigel®.

Comparing the effects of chlorhexidine and persica on alveolar bone healing following tooth extraction in rats, a randomised controlled trial

Chlorhexidine is broadly prescribed by clinicians for treating extraction socket wounds; however, studies have reported adverse effects for chlorhexidine. Persica, a herbal antibacterial agent, could be an alternative for chlorhexidine. The aim of this randomised controlled trial was to investigate the effects of persica and chlorhexidine on alveolar bone healing following tooth extraction in rats. Eighteen Wistar rats were randomly allocated to three study groups: 0.2% chlorhexidine, 10% persica and controls (tap water). The rats were mouth-rinsed for 14 days. On day 8, the mandibular right first molars of all the rats were extracted. On day 21, the rats were euthanized and histological slides of their extraction sockets were prepared. The amount of new bone formation and the number of inflammatory cells in the extraction socket for each rat were recorded. Data were analysed using linear regression and Mann-Whitney tests. There was no significant difference between the control group and the intervention groups in terms of new bone formation and inflammatory cell count. The mean new bone formation was significantly higher in the persica group than in the chlorhexidine group. There was a significant association between new bone formation and inflammatory cell count in the entire sample. In conclusion, there were no significant differences between rinsing with tap water and rinsing with 0.2% chlorhexidine and 10% persica in enhancing extraction socket wound healing in rats. Extraction socket wound healing in rats was better enhanced with 10% persica than 0.2% chlorhexidine.

Risks and complications of orthodontic miniscrews

The risks associated with miniscrew placement should be clearly understood by both the clinician and the patient. Complications can arise during miniscrew placement and after orthodontic loading that affect stability and patient safety. A thorough understanding of proper placement technique, bone density and landscape, peri-implant soft-tissue, regional anatomic structures, and patient home care are imperative for optimal patient safety and miniscrew success. The purpose of this article was to review the potential risks and complications of orthodontic miniscrews in regard to insertion, orthodontic loading, peri-implant soft-tissue health, and removal.

Evaluation of the healing response following placement of Coe-pak and an experimental pack after periodontal flap surgery

2 periodontal dressings, Coe-pak and RD8 (a product under development), were assessed following periodontal surgery, using a double-blind study of randomised split-mouth design, with each patient acting as their own control. Matched sites were selected for periodontal flap surgery under local analgesia. Sites were randomly allocated to each group. The dressings were applied by a single operator and both patients and clinical assessors were blind as to the dressing employed. The dressings were assessed as to their handling properties, in addition to a 7-day post-operative assessment of the surgical sites and a subjective patient report. Maximum pain levels were relatively low (4 in a scale 0-10); subjects reported more pain and analgesics required with RD8 than with Coe-pak. This was reflected in the results of the patient assessment which indicated that 50% preferred Coe-pak, compared to 25% who preferred the RD8 dressing. The results showed RD8 to be an acceptable periodontal dressing when compared to Coe-pak. There were no statistically significant differences between treated sites in both groups with regard to post-operative plaque scores, bleeding scores or tissue healing.

Histological evaluation of surgically treated oral tissues after application of a photocuring periodontal dressing material. An animal study

At present no information is available about biological effects on oral tissues of the photocuring periodontal dressing Barricaid. This animal study examines histologically the tissue responses of surgical areas covered during 7 days with either Barricaid, the eugenol-containing dressing Ward's Wondrpak or the bionert control gel Carboxyl Methyl Cellulose. One group was studied immediately after the removal of the dressings; in the other group, further healing was permitted for another week. Results after 7 days indicate acute inflammatory reactions in the test areas without significant differences between the 2 periodontal dressing materials. The control areas showed to a lesser degree basically the same tissue response. In the 2nd week, generally all areas healed. After 14 days, no differences between test- and control sites could be detected. From a biological point of view, these findings suggest no contra-indication for application of this photocuring dressing material after periodontal surgery.