The efficacy of a single pocket irrigation on subgingival microbial vitality

Ozone in Patients with Periodontitis: A Clinical and Microbiological Study

The purpose of this article was to assess the effectiveness of ozone therapy as an adjunct to mechanical therapy in periodontitis patients. Thirty-two patients diagnosed with generalized periodontitis were selected, with a total of 655 teeth examined. Each patient’s mouth was divided into four quadrants (the split-mouth model) to be randomly treated with four sessions of gaseous ozone or air. The following clinical variables were recorded: the gingival index, the periodontal clinical attachment loss, the Miller’s mobility index and the clinical improvements, as assessed through the visual analog scale (VAS). In addition, the microorganisms were qualitatively compared. After four weeks of treatment, the teeth of the ozone-treated quadrants showed statistically significant reductions in the gingival index and an improvement in the clinical attachment (p < 0.0001). The same treatment also significantly improved mobility by between 70% and 86% compared to the control group (p < 0.0001). Statistically significant differences were also recorded for the VAS (p < 0.0001). In the qualitative study of the subgingival flora, significant differences were observed (p < 0.0001). The overall results of this trial support the view that ozone treatment is effective and well tolerated in cases of generalized chronic periodontitis.

Efficacy of Mouth Rinses Against SARS-CoV-2: A Scoping Review

Introduction:The presence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in saliva and nasopharyngeal secretions has challenged the routine practice of dentistry. Use of preprocedural mouth rinses has been recommended by several organizations to potentially reduce the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. This scoping review aimed at evaluating the available evidence on the efficacy of mouth rinses against SARS-CoV-2.

Methods:A thorough literature search on electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar) was performed by two independent reviewers and data from articles addressing the aim of this article were extracted.

Results:After exclusion of articles not addressing the end point in question, 12 articles were included in this scoping review. Of the 12 articles, seven werein vitrostudies and five werein vivohuman clinical studies. Thein vitrostudies used a standardized methodology (endpoint dilution assay) to evaluate the efficacy of antimicrobial mouth rinses against SARS-CoV-2. Thein vivostudies were done utilizing polymerase chain reaction assay of samples obtained from saliva or nasopharyngeal swab or a combination of both nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swab. The reagents tested in these studies included povidone-iodine, chlorhexidine, hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), essential oils, and quaternary ammonium compounds and demonstrated varied efficacy against SARS-CoV-2.

Conclusion:Based on the available evidence fromin vitrostudies, it can be concluded that mouth rinses have a potential to reduce SARS-CoV-2 viral load; however, effectiveness inin vivoconditions is still inconclusive. Owing to the substantial heterogeneity in reporting of the anti–SARS-CoV-2 efficacy of mouth rinses, this review highlights the need to conduct future research with robust and standardized methodologies to confirm effectiveness of mouth rinses.

Adult periodontitis treated with a new device for subgingival lavage-a randomized controlled clinical trial using a split-mouth design

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate in patients with untreated adult periodontitis, the effect of treatment with a novel pocket irrigator/evacuator device (IED) compared to conventional subgingival debridement (CPT), both provided during the initial phase of active periodontal therapy.

METHODS

This study was an examiner-blind, randomized controlled clinical trial using a split-mouth design. Systemically healthy patients with adult periodontitis were selected. Full-mouth probing pocket depth (PPD), gingival bleeding on pocket probing scores (BOPP), gingival recession (REC) and dental plaque (PI) were assessed at baseline. All participants received oral hygiene instructions and supragingival prophylaxis including polishing. In 2 randomly assigned contra-lateral quadrants, approximal sites were irrigated with the IED, whereas in the other quadrants, CPT was provided. The CPT consisted of subgingival debridement using ultrasonic devices followed by the use of hand instruments. At 3 months post-treatment, the clinical parameters were re-assessed.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients met the inclusion criteria and were willing to participate. At 3 months post-treatment, the PPD and BOPP had significantly improved for both treatment modalities. Pockets of ≥5 mm reduced by 0.64 mm in the IED group (P < .001), compared to a reduction of 0.82 mm for the CPT group (P < .001). With respect to the primary outcome parameter (PPD) and BI, the results with the IED were less pronounced. Between the test and control groups, no significant differences were observed for REC and PI.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral hygiene instructions, supragingival prophylaxis and subgingival lavage with the IED resulted in a significant reduction in PPD and BOPP. However, the effect does not reach the results of CPT which included the subgingival use of ultrasonic and hand instruments.

Antimicrobial efficiency of mouthrinses versus and in combination with different photodynamic therapies on periodontal pathogens in an experimental study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

In the therapy of destructive periodontal disease, chemical antimicrobial agents and increasingly photodynamic therapy (PDT) play an important adjunctive role to standard mechanical anti-infective treatment procedures. However, both antiseptic methods have their shortcomings in terms of eliminating periodontal pathogens. The aim of the study was to compare the antibacterial efficacy of different antiseptic mouthrinses, of a conventional and a new, modified PDT^plus as well as of the different antiseptic mouthrinses combined with either the conventional or the modified PDT^plus against periopathogens.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Six representative periodontitis-associated bacterial strains were grown for 24 h under anaerobic conditions. After mixing the individual cell pellets they were exposed to 10 different antiseptic mouthrinse formulations: chlorhexidine (0.2%, 0.06%, CHX); CHX + cetylpyridinium chloride (each 0.05%); sodium hypochlorite (0.05%); polyhexanide (0.04%, PHMB1; 0.1%, PHMB2); octenidine dihydrochloride (0.1%); fluoride (250 ppm); essential oils; povidone iodine (10%); and saline (0.9%, NaCl) as control. Furthermore, the bacteria were treated with conventional PDT based on light-emitting diodes and a new modified photodisinfection combining photosensitizer with hydrogen peroxide to PDT^plus also based on light-emitting diodes. In addition to the single treatments, a combined application of antiseptic exposure followed by use of PDT or PDT^plus was performed. The microbial viability was characterized by analyzing colony growth and fluorescence-based vitality proportions.

RESULTS

Nearly all mouthrinses caused a statistically significant growth inhibition. The most effective antiseptics, CHX (0.2%), CHX/cetylpyridinium chloride and octenidine dihydrochloride, inhibited bacterial growth completely. Conventional PDT resulted in moderate reduction of colony growth. The modified PDT^plus achieved maximum antimicrobial effect. The combination of antiseptic exposure and PDT against periopathogens predominantly increased antibacterial efficacy compared to the single applications. The mouthrinse containing essential oil seemed to interfere with PDT.

CONCLUSION

A combination therapy of preceding chemotherapeutical exposure and subsequent photodisinfection may be a more effective and promising antibacterial treatment than single applications of the antiseptic methods. The modified PDT^plus using oxygen-enriched toluidine showed a superior antibacterial effect on periodontal pathogens to conventional PDT and to the majority of the investigated mouthrinses.

Management of Chronic Periodontitis Using Subgingival Irrigation of Ozonized Water: A Clinical and Microbiological Study

INTRODUCTION

Adjunctive use of professional subgingival irrigation with scaling and root planing (SRP) has been found to be beneficial in eradicating the residual microorganisms in the pocket.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of ozonized water subgingival irrigation on microbiologic parameters and clinical parameters namely Gingival index, probing pocket depth, and clinical attachment level.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty chronic periodontitis patients with probing pocket depth ≥6mm on at least one tooth on contra lateral sides of opposite arches were included in the study. The test sites were subjected to ozonized water subgingival irrigation with subgingival irrigation device fitted with a modified subgingival tip. Control sites were subjected to scaling and root planing only. The following clinical parameters were recorded initially and after 4 weeks at the test sites and control sites. Plaque Index, Gingival Index, probing pocket depth, clinical attachment level. Microbiologic sampling was done for the test at the baseline, after scaling, immediately after ozonized water subgingival irrigation and after 4 weeks. In control sites microbiologic sampling was done at the baseline, after scaling and after 4 weeks. The following observations were made after 4 weeks. The results were statistically analysed using independent t-test and paired t-test.

RESULT

Test sites showed a greater reduction in pocket depth and gain in clinical attachment compared to control sites. The total anaerobic counts were significantly reduced by ozonized water subgingival irrigation along with SRP compared to SRP alone.

CONCLUSION

Ozonized water subgingival irrigation can improve the clinical and microbiological parameters in patients with chronic periodontitis when used as an adjunct to scaling and root planing.

Confusion over live/dead stainings for the detection of vital microorganisms in oral biofilms--which stain is suitable?

BACKGROUND

There is confusion over the definition of the term "viability state(s)" of microorganisms. "Viability staining" or "vital staining techniques" are used to distinguish live from dead bacteria. These stainings, first established on planctonic bacteria, may have serious shortcomings when applied to multispecies biofilms. Results of staining techniques should be compared with appropriate microbiological data.

DISCUSSION

Many terms describe "vitality states" of microorganisms, however, several of them are misleading. Authors define "viable" as "capable to grow". Accordingly, staining methods are substitutes, since no staining can prove viability.The reliability of a commercial "viability" staining assay (Molecular Probes) is discussed based on the corresponding product information sheet: (I) Staining principle; (II) Concentrations of bacteria; (III) Calculation of live/dead proportions in vitro. Results of the "viability" kit are dependent on the stains' concentration and on their relation to the number of bacteria in the test. Generally this staining system is not suitable for multispecies biofilms, thus incorrect statements have been published by users of this technique.To compare the results of the staining with bacterial parameters appropriate techniques should be selected. The assessment of Colony Forming Units is insufficient, rather the calculation of Plating Efficiency is necessary. Vital fluorescence staining with Fluorescein Diacetate and Ethidium Bromide seems to be the best proven and suitable method in biofilm research.Regarding the mutagenicity of staining components users should be aware that not only Ethidium Bromide might be harmful, but also a variety of other substances of which the toxicity and mutagenicity is not reported.

SUMMARY

- The nomenclature regarding "viability" and "vitality" should be used carefully.- The manual of the commercial "viability" kit itself points out that the kit is not suitable for natural multispecies biofilm research, as supported by an array of literature.- Results obtained with various stains are influenced by the relationship between bacterial counts and the amount of stain used in the test. Corresponding vitality data are prone to artificial shifting.- As microbiological parameter the Plating Efficiency should be used for comparison.- Ethidium Bromide is mutagenic. Researchers should be aware that alternative staining compounds may also be or even are mutagenic.

Low-cost periodontal therapy

Periodontitis is a complex infectious disease that affects low-income individuals disproportionately. Periodontitis is associated with specific bacterial species and herpesviruses, and successful prevention and treatment of the disease is contingent upon effective control of these pathogens. This article presents an efficacious, highly safe, minimally invasive, practical and low-cost periodontal therapy that involves professional and patient-administered mechanical therapy and antimicrobial agents. The major components are scaling for calculus removal, periodontal pocket irrigation with potent antiseptics, and treatment with systemic antibiotics for advanced disease. Povidone-iodine and sodium hypochlorite have all the characteristics for becoming the first-choice antiseptics in the management of periodontal diseases. Both agents show excellent antibacterial and antiviral properties, are readily available throughout the world, have been safely used in periodontal therapy for decades, offer significant benefits for individuals with very limited financial resources, and are well accepted by most dental professionals and patients. Four per cent chlorhexidine applied with a toothbrush to the most posterior part to the tongue dorsum can markedly reduce or eliminate halitosis in most individuals. Systemic antibiotics are used to treat periodontopathic bacteria that are not readily reached by topical therapy, such as pathogens within gingival tissue, within furcation defects, at the base of periodontal pockets, and on the tongue, tonsils and buccal mucosae. Valuable antibiotic therapies are amoxicillin-metronidazole (250 mg of amoxicillin and 250 mg of metronidazole, three times daily for 8 days) for young and middle-aged patients, and ciprofloxacin-metronidazole (500 mg of each, twice daily for 8 days) for elderly patients and for patients in developing countries who frequently harbor enteric rods subgingivally. Scaling to remove dental calculus and the prudent use of inexpensive antimicrobial agents can significantly retard or arrest progressive periodontitis in the great majority of patients.

Clearance of topically-applied PVP-iodine as a solution or gel in periodontal pockets in men

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to investigate the clearance of PVP-iodine applied as a gel or solution in periodontal pockets.

METHODS

Teeth of 12 subjects with at least eight periodontal pockets of ≥5 mm probing depth were isolated with a rubber dam to allow contamination-free access to the pockets. In each subject, three pockets were filled with PVP-iodine gel (10%) and three with PVP-iodine solution (10%). One pocket of each subject without iodine application served as a negative control. The treatment allocation was assigned randomly. Any excess material was removed subsequently. After 1, 5 and 15 min, a paper point was used to collect the sulcus liquid and the concentration of PVP-iodine was chemically determined. In addition, PVP-iodine gel was administered into 12 periodontal pockets immediately after sub-gingival ultrasound debridement and the concentration of PVP-iodine was determined after 1 min.

RESULTS

Descending concentrations of PVP-iodine were determined at 1, 5 and 15 min after the application. No PVP-iodine was found in the pockets serving as negative controls. The mean concentrations of the gel and solution were 6.14 μg/ml and 4.44 μg/ml (1 min; p ≥ 0.028), 3.20 μg/ml and 1.44 μg/ml (5 min; p ≥ 0.126), 0.69 μg/ml and 0.23 μg/ml (15 min; p ≤ 0.019), respectively. In the pockets with previous debridement the mean concentration was 1.68 ± 1.97 μg/ml.

CONCLUSION

The application of PVP-iodine gel in periodontal pockets allows a prolonged remnant effect as compared to that of the solution formula.

An 8-week, randomized, controlled, clinical study of the use of a 0.1% chlorhexidine mouthwash by chronic periodontitis patients

AIM

  To evaluate the efficacy of a 2-week administration of a 0.1% chlorhexidine mouthwash in the short-term treatment of chronic periodontitis patients and the impact of this product when administered twice by pocket irrigation.

METHODS

  Sixty patients were enrolled in a single-centre, placebo-controlled, randomized study with the blind allocation of product to two parallel groups. Clinical assessments were performed, and samples from six selected subgingival sites were collected for microbial analysis by culture at baseline, D15 and D56. Three of the six sites were randomly selected and were treated by subgingival irrigation with the same 0.1% chlorhexidine product at D0 and D7. A subsequent statistical analysis was performed using the paired Student's t-test and Wilcoxon rank sum test for within-group analyses; analysis of variance and the Kruskall-Wallis test were used for between-group analyses.

RESULTS

  Two-week treatment with a 0.1% chlorhexidine mouthwash slightly reduced the gingival inflammation associated with periodontitis. We observed a significant decrease in Gram-negative, facultative anaerobes and micro-aerophiles, and a significant increase in Gram-positive cocci. No increase in the treatment effect was demonstrated by irrigation of the periodontal pockets.

CONCLUSION

  The 0.1% chlorhexidine mouthwash showed limited beneficial effects in the treatment of periodontitis patients.

Systematic review on the effect of rinsing with povidone-iodine during nonsurgical periodontal therapy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The existing literature is inconsistent regarding whether there is any additional effect of povidone-iodine (PVP-iodine) as an adjunctive to scaling and root planing, and, if there is an effect, what its size is. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the additional effect of PVP-iodine as an adjunct to scaling and root planing compared with water, saline or no rinse in the treatment of chronic periodontitis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An electronic literature search of the databases PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Library, and a handsearch, were performed (up to November 2008). Two reviewers independently identified and selected screened abstracts for possible inclusion, and assessed randomized, controlled clinical trials comparing the additional benefit of PVP-iodine with water, saline rinsing or no rinsing in the nonsurgical periodontal therapy of patients with chronic periodontitis. A fixed-effects meta-analysis was conducted in the absence of statistically significant heterogeneity.

RESULTS

A small, but statistically significant additional beneficial effect of the adjunctive use of PVP-iodine with enhanced probing pocket depth reductions of 0.28 mm (95% confidence interval: 0.08 to 0.48, p = 0.007) was found. There was no significant heterogeneity between studies (I(2) = 0%). However, most of the studies included in the meta-analysis were of low quality, and the treatment modalities showed various differences such as the use of PVP-iodine at different concentrations and application modalities. Nevertheless, single-rooted teeth, in particular, showed an additional benefit after scaling and root planing with PVP-iodine, particularly when the treatment was repeated during the healing stage.

CONCLUSION

The adjunctive use of PVP-iodine during scaling and root planing may increase the clinical pocket depth reduction, although the clinical significance is small to moderate.

How to select the right mouthrinses in periodontal prevention and therapy. Part II. Clinical use and recommendations

Based on scientific proof, only few mouthrinse solutions can be recommended. However, it is impossible to construct an extended table that would provide precise recommendations or advices for mouthrinse utilisation related to any possible discomfort or diseases. Only reliable information on the drugs available against periodontal disease can be offered to the therapist. By evaluation of her or his individual experiences, she or he has to judge all the armamentarium she or he possesses to react in the best possible way in each specific situation.

How to select the right mouthrinses in periodontal prevention and therapy. Part I. Test systems and clinical investigations

The use of mouthrinses is increasing, especially as adjuncts to the daily mechanical oral hygiene. Different test systems may and can be used to test their antibacterial and clinical effects: bacteriology in vitro, substantivity in vivo, 4-day plaque re-growth, experimental gingivitis and long-term use. The plaque re-growth investigations of a few days are not only of limited use but may also be dangerous because often too extensive conclusions have been drawn from their design. The 'gold standard' test is the experimental gingivitis model to reveal the antiplaque as well as the antigingivitis effects of any mouthrinse preparation during 3 weeks. The last kind of investigations are of several months' duration, where the substances are used as supplements to mechanical oral hygiene measures.

Povidone-iodine as a periodontal pocket disinfectant

OBJECTIVES AND BACKGROUND

Povidone-iodine [polyvinylpyrrolidone-iodine complex (PVP-iodine)] might constitute a valuable adjunct to current periodontal therapy because of its broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity, low potential for developing resistance and adverse reactions, wide availability, ease of use, and low financial cost. This investigation employed a randomized, split-mouth study design to determine the microbiological and clinical effects of 10% PVP-iodine subgingival irrigation in periodontitis lesions showing radiographic evidence of subgingival calculus.

METHODS

Sixteen adults having at least one periodontal pocket of 6 mm or more in each quadrant of the dentition and harboring one or more periodontopathic bacteria participated in the study. In each subject, a study site in each quadrant was randomly chosen to receive either subgingival irrigation with 10% PVP-iodine together with scaling and root planing, scaling and root planing alone, subgingival irrigation with 10% PVP-iodine, or subgingival irrigation with sterile saline. Prior to therapy and at 5 weeks post-treatment, microbiological culture was carried out without knowledge of the clinical status or the type of treatment rendered. A blinded clinical examiner determined presence of dental plaque, probing pocket depth, and gingival bleeding on probing. Microbiological and clinical data were analyzed using a repeated measures analysis of variance and Kruskal-Wallis rank test with the Tukey and Mann-Whitney post hoc tests.

RESULTS

At 5 weeks post-treatment, subgingival irrigation with PVP-iodine together with scaling and root planing caused a 95% or greater reduction in total pathogen counts in 44% of pockets having >/= 6 mm depth whereas scaling and root planing alone, povidone-iodine irrigation alone and water irrigation alone caused 95% reduction of total pathogens only in 6-13% of similar study sites (P = 0.02). Reduction in mean pocket depth was 1.8 mm for the PVP-iodine/scaling and root planing group, 1.6 mm for the scaling and root planing group, and 0.9 mm for the PVP-iodine and the saline monotherapy groups, with statistical significance reached for the scaling and root planing group vs. the PVP-iodine group (P = 0.04) and for the scaling and root planing group vs. the saline group (P = 0.02). Reduction in visible dental plaque, which ranged from 38% to 62%, showed no significant differences among treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of subgingival PVP-iodine irrigation to conventional mechanical therapy may be a cost-effective means of reducing total counts of periodontal pathogens and helping control periodontal disease. However, subgingival irrigation with PVP-iodine without concomitant mechanical debridement might not improve microbiological and clinical variables in comparison with saline irrigation, at least not in sites with radiographic evidence of subgingival calculus.

Selection of antimicrobial agents in periodontal therapy

BACKGROUND

The recognition over the past 3 decades of microbial specificity in periodontitis has afforded dental practitioners the ability to prevent and treat the disease with a variety of antimicrobial drugs. These include systemic antibiotics, topical antibiotics and topical antiseptics.

RESULTS

Systemic antibiotic therapy can be essential in eliminating pathogenic bacteria that invade gingival tissue and in helping control periodontal pathogens residing in various domains of the mouth from where they may translocate to periodontal sites. Frequently used periodontal combination antibiotic therapies are metronidazole-amoxicillin (250-375 mg of each 3 x daily for 8 days) and metronidazole-ciprofloxacin (500 mg of each 2 x daily for 8 days). Microbiological analysis helps determine the optimal antibiotic therapy and effectiveness of treatment. Topical antibiotics that are commercially available as controlled release devices suffer from several potential problems, including insufficient spectrum of antimicrobial activity in some periodontal polymicrobial infections, risks of producing an antibiotic resistant microbiota, and high acquisition costs. Topical antiseptics of relevance in periodontal treatment include 10% povidone-iodine placed subgingivally by a syringe for 5 min, and 0.1% sodium hypochlorite solution applied subgingivally by patients using an irrigation device.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

The present paper recommends periodontal treatment that includes a battery of professionally and patient-administered antimicrobial agents (properly prescribed systemic antibiotics, povidone-iodine and sodium hypochlorite subgingival irrigants, and chlorhexidine mouthrinse). Available chemotherapeutics can provide effective, safe, practical and affordable means of controlling subgingival colonization of periodontal pathogens and various types of periodontal disease.