BACKGROUND: Invisibility of subgingival scaling is the most important negative factor affecting the performance of periodontal treatment. A multisensory teaching strategy is used in the preclinical training of undergraduates in order to increase the haptic-auditory-visual feedback, aiming to overcome the invisibility and achieve minimal postoperative complications, improving patients\' treatment experience.
METHODS: One hundred undergraduate dental students in grade 5 were divided into a multisensory teaching strategy group (MTS: n = 50) and a conventional training pattern group (CTP: n = 50). All participants attended a lecture on using an ultrasonic subgingival scaler (USS) and Gracey curettes (GRA), followed by a 3-week training programme. Students in the MTS group were trained in a haptic/auditory-visual feedback manner, whereas students in the CTP group were trained conventionally. After the training phase, paired students in the 2 different groups performed subgingival scaling in paired patients with equivalent teeth of periodontitis using USS and GRA. Objective and subjective postoperative evaluations were recorded. Probing depth (PD) and gingival index (GI) were evaluated before and 4 weeks after scaling by the same periodontal specialist.
RESULTS: MTS significantly reduced treatment time and ameliorated postoperative complications (gingival injury, haemorrhage and root surface roughness; P < .05). Postoperative sensitivity was reduced in the MTS group from day 1 to day 7 (D1-D5: P < .001; D6: P = .002; D7: P = .003), whereas postoperative pain was reduced on day 1 (P = .006), compared with that in the CTP group. The PD reduction was not significant between the groups (MTS: 3.17 ± 0.95 mm vs CTP: 3.07 ± 0.97 mm, P > .05), whereas the GI change showed a significant difference between the groups (MTS: 1.71 ± 0.41 vs CTP: 1.67 ± 0.41, P < .05).
CONCLUSIONS: Multisensory teaching strategies in the preclinical periodontal training of undergraduates can reduce postoperative complications (gingival injury, postoperative haemorrhage, and root surface roughness) and provide a better treatment experience (decreased treatment time and postoperative pain and sensitivity) for patients.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the treatment effects of periodontal endoscope-assisted and traditional subgingival scaling on residual pockets.
METHODS: A total of 13 patients with periodontitis from Dept. of Periodontics, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University were recruited. After 4-6 weeks of initial treatment, the residual pockets with a probing depth (PD) of ≥4 mm and attachment loss (AL) of ≥4 mm and bleeding on probing were examined with traditional (control group) and periodontal endoscope-assisted subgingival scaling (endoscopy group) in a randomly controlled split-mouth design. At baseline and 6 weeks and 3 months after treatment, plaque index (PLI), PD, AL, and bleeding index (BI) were measured. Differences in these clinical parameters within and between groups and patient-reported outcomes were compared.
RESULTS: A total of the 694 sites of 251 teeth were included in this trial. Both groups showed significant improvement in each periodontal parameters 6 weeks and 3 months after treatment (P<0.001). For sites in a single-rooted tooth, sites with PD≥5 mm, and sites without vertical alveolar bone resorption and furcation involvement, the PD in endoscopy group was significantly lower than that in the control group at 6 weeks and 3 months after treatment (P<0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Periodontal endoscope-assisted subgingival scaling resulted in better effects than traditional subgingival scaling when the residual pockets were in a single-rooted tooth, with a PD of ≥5 mm but without vertical alveolar bone resorption and furcation involvement.
目的: 探究牙周内窥镜辅助龈下刮治和传统龈下刮治对非手术治疗后残存牙周袋的临床疗效差异。方法: 收集2019年6—12月于四川大学华西口腔医院牙周病科就诊的牙周炎患者13例，以基础治疗后4~6周再评估时探诊深度（PD）≥4 mm、附着丧失（AL）≥4 mm且探诊出血的残存牙周袋为研究对象，进行分口设计的单盲随机对照试验，口内一侧行传统龈下刮治（对照组），另一侧行牙周内窥镜辅助龈下刮治（内窥镜组）。在基线、治疗后6周和治疗后3月分别测量菌斑指数（PLI）、PD、AL及出血指数（BI），比较治疗前后2组各项牙周指标的变化和组间差异，并比较2组患者报告结局的差异。结果: 共251颗患牙的694个位点纳入临床试验。治疗后6周和3月2组各项牙周指标均显著改善（P<0.001）。对于单根牙、探诊深度≥5 mm的位点以及牙槽骨无角形吸收且无根分叉病变的位点，治疗后6周及3月内窥镜组的PD均低于对照组（P<0.05）。结论: 牙周内窥镜辅助龈下刮治对单根牙、PD≥5 mm及牙槽骨无角形吸收且无根分叉病变的残存牙周袋的疗效优于传统龈下刮治。.

(-)-Epigallocatechin Gallate (EGCG) as green tea catechins possessed antibacterial and anti-inflammatory effects on periodontal disease. This study was designed to evaluate the clinical and microbiological efficacy of scaling and root planing (SRP) using EGCG aqueous solution as coolants through a new-type ultrasonic scaler tip on chronic periodontitis.
This split-mouth, randomized clinical trial included 20 patients (2 drop-outs) with chronic periodontitis and the maxillary contra-lateral sides were allocated into test and control groups randomly. Through the new-type scaler tip, 762 sites with probing depth (PD) ≥ 4 mm were treated by SRP using EGCG solution or distilled water as coolants respectively. Clinical parameters and red complex pathogens in subgingival microbiome were evaluated at baseline, 3 and 6 months after treatments.
During 6 months, the SRP plus EGCG medication contributed to additional PD reduction as 0.33 mm and gain of clinical attachment level as 0.3 mm compared with SRP alone, and approximate 8% more sites obtained PD reduction ≥ 2 mm (p < 0.05). Meanwhile, the mean relative abundance of Tannerella forsythia was significantly lower in the combined treatment group (p < 0.05).
The purified EGCG showed the potential to improve the outcome of periodontal non-surgical treatment and the new-type scaler tip provided an alternative vehicle for subgingival medication. Trial registration The trial was registered in Chinese Clinical Trial Registry on 15 February 2020 (No.: ChiCTR2000029831, retrospectively registered). http://www.chictr.org.cn/showprojen.aspx?proj=49441 .

Mechanical plaque removal has been commonly accepted to be the basis for periodontal treatment. This study aims to compare the effectiveness of ultrasonic and manual subgingival scaling at different initial probing pocket depths (PPD) in periodontal treatment.
English-language databases (PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, Medline, and ClinicalTrials.gov, by January, 2019) were searched. Weighted mean differences in primary outcomes, PPD and clinical attachment loss (CAL) reduction, were estimated by random effects model. Secondary outcomes, bleeding on probing (BOP), gingival recession (GR), and post-scaling residual dental calculus, were analyzed by comparing the results of each study. The quality of RCTs was appraised with the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool. The GRADE approach was used to assess quality of evidence.
Ten randomized controlled trials were included out of 1434 identified. Initial PPD and follow-up periods formed subgroups. For 3-months follow-up: (1) too few shallow initial pocket studies available to draw a conclusion; (2) the heterogeneity of medium depth studies was so high that could not be merged to draw a conclusion; (3) deep pocket studies showed no statistical differences in PPD and CAL reduction between ultrasonic and manual groups. For 6-months follow-up: (1) too few shallow initial PPD studies to draw a conclusion; (2) at medium pocket depth, PPD reduction showed manual subgingival scaling better than ultrasound. No statistical differences were observed in CAL reduction between the two approaches; (3) for deep initial PPD studies, both PPD and CAL reduction showed manual subgingival scaling better. GR results indicated no statistical differences at medium and deep initial pocket studies between the two methods. BOP results showed more reduction at deep pocket depths with manual subgingival scaling. No conclusion could be drawn about residual dental calculus.
When initial PPD was 4-6 mm, PPD reduction proved manual subgingival scaling was superior, but CAL results showed no statistical differences between the two means. When initial PPD was ≥6 mm, PPD and CAL reductions suggested that manual subgingival scaling was superior.