Dental scaling

牙科缩放
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:研究使用准实验设计来评估缩放补偿政策对慢性牙周炎发生率的影响。
    方法:使用来自韩国国家健康保险服务-国家样本队列(n=740,467)和健康筛查队列(n=337,904)的牙周炎相关程序的数量数据,使用中断时间序列分析来比较政策实施前后的效果。具有诊断代码的牙周炎相关程序被分类为基本(缩放或根部平整),中级(龈下刮治)和高级(拔牙,牙周皮瓣手术,骨移植治疗牙槽骨缺损或引导组织再生)。考虑了受试者的人口统计学和合并症。评估了政策实施前后的即时变化和渐进影响的发生率。
    结果:从2013年7月开始实施政策后,观察到总体和基本程序立即增加。最初在中级和高级程序中没有发现重大变化。在两个数据库中都观察到中间程序的斜率降低。先进的程序显示出不同的趋势,国家样本队列没有变化,但健康筛查队列增加了,特别是在有合并症的受试者中。
    结论:在新政策实施之后,中间程序的数量减少,而高级程序的数量增加,尤其是有合并症的患者。这些发现为政策评估提供了宝贵的见解。
    OBJECTIVE: To study the use of a quasi-experimental design to assess the effects of scaling reimbursement policies on the incidence of chronic-periodontitis procedures.
    METHODS: Interrupted time series analysis was used to compare the effects before and after policy implementation using data on the number of periodontitis-related procedures from the Korean National Health Insurance Service-National Sample Cohort (n = 740,467) and the Health Screening Cohort (n = 337,904). Periodontitis-related procedures with diagnosis codes were categorized into basic (scaling or root planing), intermediate (subgingival curettage) and advanced (tooth extraction, periodontal flap surgery, bone grafting for alveolar bone defects or guided tissue regeneration). Subjects\' demographics and comorbidities were considered. The incidence rate of immediate changes and gradual effects before and after policy implementation was assessed.
    RESULTS: Following the policy implementation from July 2013, an immediate increase was observed in total and basic procedures. No significant changes were noted in intermediate and advanced procedures initially. A decrease in the slope of intermediate procedures was observed in both databases. Advanced procedures showed varied trends, with no change in the National Sample Cohort but an increase in the Health Screening Cohort, particularly among subjects with comorbidities.
    CONCLUSIONS: Following the new policy implementation, the number of intermediate procedures decreased while the number of advanced procedures increased, especially among patients with comorbidities. These findings offer valuable insights on policy evaluation.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    评估慢性肾脏病患者的术后并发症和死亡率。
    生化测量,2009-2017年,我们从台湾三家大型医院的电子病历中获取了年龄≥20岁手术患者的CKD诊断代码和合并症.我们通过使用倾向评分匹配方法来平衡CKD和非CKD组之间的基线特征,进行了这项回顾性队列研究。多因素logistic回归分析用于估计与CKD相关的主要结局(包括术后死亡率)和次要结局(包括术后感染性并发症和非感染性并发症)风险的比值比(ORs)和95%置信区间(CIs)。
    在31950名合格的手术患者中,与非CKD对照组相比,CKD患者院内死亡率的校正OR为5.49(95%CI3.42~8.81).术后败血症的校正OR,CKD患者的肺炎和蜂窝织炎为5.90(95%CI2.12-16.5),5.39(95%CI1.37-21.16),和4.42(95%CI1.57-12.4),分别,与非CKD患者相比。CKD也与术后卒中相关(OR2.21,95%CI1.47-3.31)。
    CKD患者术后卒中的风险增加,感染并发症,和死亡率。我们的研究表明,改善CKD患者术前血红蛋白和K水平至关重要。应制定预防策略以改善这些人群的临床结果。
    UNASSIGNED: To evaluate the postoperative complications and mortality among patients with chronic kidney disease.
    UNASSIGNED: Biochemical measurements, diagnosis codes for CKD and comorbid conditions for surgical patients aged ≥20 years were obtained from electronic medical records of three large hospitals in Taiwan in 2009-2017. We conducted this retrospective cohort study by using propensity score-matching methods to balance the baseline characteristics between CKD and non-CKD groups. The multiple logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of risks of primary outcome (included postoperative mortality) and secondary outcome (included postoperative infectious complications and non-infectious complications) associated with CKD.
    UNASSIGNED: Among 31950 eligible surgical patients, the adjusted OR of in-hospital mortality in patients with CKD was 5.49 (95% CI 3.42-8.81) compared with that in non-CKD controls. The adjusted ORs of postoperative septicemia, pneumonia and cellulitis in patients with CKD were 5.90 (95% CI 2.12-16.5), 5.39 (95% CI 1.37-21.16), and 4.42 (95% CI 1.57-12.4), respectively, when compared with the non-CKD patients. CKD was also associated with postoperative stroke (OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.47-3.31).
    UNASSIGNED: Patients with CKD are at increased risk of postoperative stroke, infectious complications, and mortality. Our study implicated that it is crucial to improve the levels of hemoglobin and K+ in patients with CKD before surgery. Preventive strategies should be developed to improve clinical outcomes in these populations.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:评估富血小板纤维蛋白(PRF)作为牙垢和牙根平整(ScRp)辅助治疗浅层牙周袋的疗效。
    方法:12例牙周炎患者入组,随机临床试验。通过单独的ScRp(对照)或PRF(测试)治疗总共24个浅牙周袋(4-6mm)。临床依恋丧失(CAL),探测袋深度(PPD),探查出血(BOP),和菌斑指数(PLI),以及通过酶联免疫吸附测定(ELISA)在龈沟液(GCF)中的血小板衍生生长因子-BB(PDGF-BB)在基线和1个月和3个月随访时进行了测定.
    结果:在1个月和3个月的随访中,更大的CAL增益(2.6±0.25mm和3.26±0.31mm,分别)和PPD减小(2.58±0.38和3.31±0.39mm,分别)与对照组相比,在测试组中观察到(CAL增益为1.01±0.49mm和1.43±0.48mm;PPD降低为1.1±0.55和1.37±0.49mm,分别)。此外,在1个月和3个月随访时,试验组GCF中PDGF-BB的增加(724.5±186.09pg/μl和1957.5±472.9pg/μl)明显大于对照组(109.3±24.07和614.64±209.3pg/μl),分别。
    结论:无创性使用PRF作为ScRp的辅助手段成功地改善了临床牙周参数,并可能有助于GCF中PDGF-BB的增加。
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) as an adjunct to scaling and root planing (ScRp) for healing shallow periodontal pockets.
    METHODS: Twelve patients with periodontitis were enrolled in this split-mouth, randomized clinical trial. A total of 24 shallow periodontal pockets (4-6 mm) were treated by either ScRp alone (control) or PRF (test). Clinical attachment loss (CAL), probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP), and plaque index (PLI), as well as platelet-derived growth factor-BB (PDGF-BB) by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) in gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) were measured at baseline and at 1- and 3-month follow-up visits.
    RESULTS: At 1- and 3-month follow-up visits, greater CAL gains (2.6 ± 0.25 mm and 3.26 ± 0.31 mm, respectively) and PPD reductions (2.58 ± 0.38 and 3.31 ± 0.39 mm, respectively) were observed in the test group compared to those in controls (CAL gain of 1.01 ± 0.49 mm and 1.43 ± 0.48 mm; PPD reduction of 1.1 ± 0.55 and 1.37 ± 0.49 mm, respectively). In addition, the increase in PDGF-BB in GCF in the test group (724.5 ± 186.09 pg/μl and 1957.5 ± 472.9 pg/μl) was significantly greater than that in controls (109.3 ± 24.07 and 614.64 ± 209.3 pg/μl) at 1- and 3-month follow-up visits, respectively.
    CONCLUSIONS: The noninvasive use of PRF as an adjunct to ScRp successfully improved clinical periodontal parameters and might contribute to increased PDGF-BB in GCF.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Systematic Review
    背景:牙周炎和种植体周围疾病是发生在口腔中的慢性炎性疾病。未经治疗,牙周炎会逐渐破坏牙齿支撑装置。种植体周围疾病发生在牙种植体周围的组织中,其特征是种植体周围粘膜发炎,随后逐渐丧失支持骨。治疗旨在清洁牙齿或牙科植入物周围的口袋,并防止对周围的软组织和骨骼造成损害,包括改善口腔卫生,危险因素控制(如鼓励戒烟)和手术干预。标准非手术治疗的关键方面是使用龈下器械(SI)(也称为鳞屑和根部平整)去除龈下生物膜。抗微生物光动力疗法(aPDT)可用作SI的辅助治疗。它使用光能杀死在aPDT之前立即用光吸收光敏剂处理的微生物。
    目的:评估SI联合辅助aPDT与单纯SI或安慰剂aPDT对成人牙周炎和种植体周围疾病的影响。
    方法:我们搜索了Cochrane口腔健康试验注册,中部,MEDLINE,Embase,截至2024年2月14日,另外两个数据库和两个试验登记。
    方法:我们纳入了临床诊断为牙周炎的参与者的随机对照试验(RCT)(平行组和口设计),种植体周围炎或种植体周围疾病。我们比较了抗菌光动力疗法(aPDT)的辅助使用,其中在牙龈下或粘膜下器械(SI)后给予aPDT,与单独SI或SI和安慰剂aPDT的组合在活性或支持治疗阶段。
    方法:我们使用了标准的Cochrane方法学程序,我们用等级来评估证据的确定性.我们优先考虑了六个结果和从基线到治疗后六个月的变化测量:探查口袋深度(PPD),探查出血(BOP),临床依恋水平(CAL),牙龈衰退(REC),口袋闭合和与aPDT相关的不良反应。我们还对骨水平的变化感兴趣(对于患有种植体周围炎的参与者),以及参与者的满意度和生活质量。
    结果:我们纳入了50项RCT,其中有1407名参与者。大多数研究使用口裂研究设计;只有18项研究使用平行组设计。研究很小,参与者从10到88。在39项研究中,辅助aPDT在一个疗程中被给予,在11项研究的多次会议(两到四次会议)中,一项研究包括单次和多次会议。SI使用手动或动力驱动仪器(或两者)给出,并在辅助aPDT之前进行。5项研究在对照组中使用安慰剂aPDT,我们在荟萃分析中将这些研究与仅使用SI的研究相结合。所有研究都包括高或不清楚的偏倚风险,例如人员的选择偏差或绩效偏差(当SI由知道组分配的操作员执行时)。由于这些偏见的风险,我们降低了所有证据的确定性,以及合并效应估计中无法解释的统计学不一致或证据来自极少数参与者且置信区间(CI)显示干预组和对照组可能受益的不精确.在牙周炎的积极治疗期间,辅助aPDT与单独SI相比(44项研究)我们非常不确定在牙周炎的积极治疗期间辅助aPDT与单独SI相比是否在六个月时导致任何临床结果的改善:PPD(平均差异(MD)0.52mm,95%CI0.31至0.74;15项研究,452名参与者),防喷器(MD5.72%,95%CI1.62至9.81;5项研究,171项研究),CAL(MD0.44mm,95%CI0.24至0.64;13项研究,414名参与者)和REC(MD0.00,95%CI-0.16至0.16;4项研究,95名参与者);非常低的确定性证据。辅助aPDT和单独SI之间的任何明显差异均未被认为是临床重要的。24项研究(639名参与者)没有观察到与aPDT相关的不良反应(中度确定性证据)。没有研究报告六个月时口袋关闭,参与者满意度或生活质量。在牙周炎的支持治疗期间,辅助aPDT与单独SI相比(六项研究)我们非常不确定在牙周炎的积极治疗期间,辅助aPDT与单独SI相比是否会在六个月时导致任何临床结果的改善:PPD(MD-0.04毫米,95%CI-0.19至0.10;3项研究,125名参与者),防喷器(MD4.98%,95%CI-2.51至12.46;3项研究,127名与会者),CAL(MD0.07mm,95%CI-0.26至0.40;2项研究,85名参与者)和REC(MD-0.20毫米,95%CI-0.48至0.08;1项研究,24名参与者);确定性非常低的证据。这些发现都是不精确的,并且不包括aPDT的临床重要益处。三项研究(134名参与者)报告了不良反应:一名参与者出现脓肿,尽管目前尚不清楚这是否与aPDT有关,两项研究未观察到与aPDT相关的不良反应(中度确定性证据)。没有研究报告六个月时口袋关闭,参与者满意度或生活质量。
    结论:因为证据的确定性非常低,我们无法确定辅助aPDT在牙周炎的积极或支持治疗期间是否能改善临床结果;此外,结果表明,任何改善都可能太小而不具有临床重要性.这种证据的确定性只能通过包含大量的,进行良好的RCTs进行了适当的分析,以解释随时间的结果变化或参与者内部的口口裂研究设计(或两者)。我们没有发现包括种植体周围炎在内的研究,只有一项研究包括患有种植体周围粘膜炎的人,但是这项非常小的研究报告六个月没有数据,在这一人群中,有更多辅助aPDT的证据。
    Periodontitis and peri-implant diseases are chronic inflammatory conditions occurring in the mouth. Left untreated, periodontitis progressively destroys the tooth-supporting apparatus. Peri-implant diseases occur in tissues around dental implants and are characterised by inflammation in the peri-implant mucosa and subsequent progressive loss of supporting bone. Treatment aims to clean the pockets around teeth or dental implants and prevent damage to surrounding soft tissue and bone, including improvement of oral hygiene, risk factor control (e.g. encouraging cessation of smoking) and surgical interventions. The key aspect of standard non-surgical treatment is the removal of the subgingival biofilm using subgingival instrumentation (SI) (also called scaling and root planing). Antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) can be used an adjunctive treatment to SI. It uses light energy to kill micro-organisms that have been treated with a light-absorbing photosensitising agent immediately prior to aPDT.
    To assess the effects of SI with adjunctive aPDT versus SI alone or with placebo aPDT for periodontitis and peri-implant diseases in adults.
    We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two other databases and two trials registers up to 14 February 2024.
    We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (both parallel-group and split-mouth design) in participants with a clinical diagnosis of periodontitis, peri-implantitis or peri-implant disease. We compared the adjunctive use of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT), in which aPDT was given after subgingival or submucosal instrumentation (SI), versus SI alone or a combination of SI and a placebo aPDT given during the active or supportive phase of therapy.
    We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures, and we used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. We prioritised six outcomes and the measure of change from baseline to six months after treatment: probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP), clinical attachment level (CAL), gingival recession (REC), pocket closure and adverse effects related to aPDT. We were also interested in change in bone level (for participants with peri-implantitis), and participant satisfaction and quality of life.
    We included 50 RCTs with 1407 participants. Most studies used a split-mouth study design; only 18 studies used a parallel-group design. Studies were small, ranging from 10 participants to 88. Adjunctive aPDT was given in a single session in 39 studies, in multiple sessions (between two and four sessions) in 11 studies, and one study included both single and multiple sessions. SI was given using hand or power-driven instrumentation (or both), and was carried out prior to adjunctive aPDT. Five studies used placebo aPDT in the control group and we combined these in meta-analyses with studies in which SI alone was used. All studies included high or unclear risks of bias, such as selection bias or performance bias of personnel (when SI was carried out by an operator aware of group allocation). We downgraded the certainty of all the evidence owing to these risks of bias, as well as for unexplained statistical inconsistency in the pooled effect estimates or for imprecision when evidence was derived from very few participants and confidence intervals (CI) indicated possible benefit to both intervention and control groups. Adjunctive aPDT versus SI alone during active treatment of periodontitis (44 studies) We are very uncertain whether adjunctive aPDT during active treatment of periodontitis leads to improvement in any clinical outcomes at six months when compared to SI alone: PPD (mean difference (MD) 0.52 mm, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.74; 15 studies, 452 participants), BOP (MD 5.72%, 95% CI 1.62 to 9.81; 5 studies, 171 studies), CAL (MD 0.44 mm, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.64; 13 studies, 414 participants) and REC (MD 0.00, 95% CI -0.16 to 0.16; 4 studies, 95 participants); very low-certainty evidence. Any apparent differences between adjunctive aPDT and SI alone were not judged to be clinically important. Twenty-four studies (639 participants) observed no adverse effects related to aPDT (moderate-certainty evidence). No studies reported pocket closure at six months, participant satisfaction or quality of life. Adjunctive aPDT versus SI alone during supportive treatment of periodontitis (six studies) We were very uncertain whether adjunctive aPDT during supportive treatment of periodontitis leads to improvement in any clinical outcomes at six months when compared to SI alone: PPD (MD -0.04 mm, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.10; 3 studies, 125 participants), BOP (MD 4.98%, 95% CI -2.51 to 12.46; 3 studies, 127 participants), CAL (MD 0.07 mm, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.40; 2 studies, 85 participants) and REC (MD -0.20 mm, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.08; 1 study, 24 participants); very low-certainty evidence. These findings were all imprecise and included no clinically important benefits for aPDT. Three studies (134 participants) reported adverse effects: a single participant developed an abscess, though it is not evident whether this was related to aPDT, and two studies observed no adverse effects related to aPDT (moderate-certainty evidence). No studies reported pocket closure at six months, participant satisfaction or quality of life.
    Because the certainty of the evidence is very low, we cannot be sure if adjunctive aPDT leads to improved clinical outcomes during the active or supportive treatment of periodontitis; moreover, results suggest that any improvements may be too small to be clinically important. The certainty of this evidence can only be increased by the inclusion of large, well-conducted RCTs that are appropriately analysed to account for change in outcome over time or within-participant split-mouth study designs (or both). We found no studies including people with peri-implantitis, and only one study including people with peri-implant mucositis, but this very small study reported no data at six months, warranting more evidence for adjunctive aPDT in this population group.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Clinical Trial
    背景:没有足够的临床和微生物学证据支持使用二极管激光和赤藓糖醇的空气抛光作为鳞片和根部规划(SRP)的补充。本研究的目的是评估赤藓糖醇牙龈下空气抛光和二极管激光治疗牙周炎的临床和微生物疗效。
    方法:该研究包括24名寻求牙周治疗并诊断为I期和II期牙周炎的个体。八名患者仅接受了SRP。另有8名患者接受了SRP,然后进行了赤藓糖醇龈下空气抛光,8例患者接受了SRP,然后应用了二极管激光。在基线和六周,测量牙周临床参数,包括斑块指数(PI),牙龈指数(GI),牙周探伤深度(PPD),和临床依恋水平(CAL)。放线菌的细菌计数(A.A),牙龈卟啉单胞菌(P.G)在不同的时间点进行评价。
    结果:微生物学评估显示,治疗后立即激光组和赤藓糖醇组之间的A.A.计数存在显着差异,表明对微生物水平的潜在影响。然而,微生物水平在随后的几周内出现波动,没有统计学上的显著差异。各组治疗后斑块指数显著下降,组间无显著差异。牙龈指数下降,激光组显示低于赤藓糖醇和对照组。PPD和CAL在所有组显著下降,激光组表现出最低值。
    结论:补充使用二极管激光和赤藓糖醇空气抛光,与SRP一起,代表加速牙周治疗方式。这种方法导致细菌的减少和牙周健康的改善。
    背景:该临床试验已在ClinicalTrials.gov(注册ID:NCT06209554)上注册,并于2024年01月08日发布。
    BACKGROUND: There is insufficient clinical and microbiological evidence to support the use of diode laser and air-polishing with erythritol as supplements to scaling and root planning(SRP). The aim of the current study is to evaluate the clinical and microbiologic efficacy of erythritol subgingival air polishing and diode laser in treatment of periodontitis.
    METHODS: The study encompassed twenty-four individuals seeking periodontal therapy and diagnosed with stage I and stage II periodontitis. Eight patients simply underwent SRP. Eight more patients had SRP followed by erythritol subgingival air polishing, and eight patients had SRP followed by diode laser application. At baseline and six weeks, clinical periodontal parameters were measured, including Plaque Index (PI), Gingival Index (GI), periodontal Probing Depth (PPD), and Clinical Attachment Level (CAL). The bacterial count of Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans(A.A), Porphyromonas gingivalis (P.G) was evaluated at different points of time.
    RESULTS: The microbiological assessment revealed significant differences in the count of A.A. between the laser and erythritol groups immediately after treatment, indicating a potential impact on microbial levels. However, the microbial levels showed fluctuations over the subsequent weeks, without statistically significant differences. Plaque indices significantly decreased post-treatment in all groups, with no significant inter-group differences. Gingival indices decreased, and the laser group showed lower values than erythritol and control groups. PPD and CAL decreased significantly across all groups, with the laser group exhibiting the lowest values.
    CONCLUSIONS: The supplementary use of diode laser and erythritol air polishing, alongside SRP, represents an expedited periodontal treatment modality. This approach leads to a reduction in bacteria and improvement in periodontal health.
    BACKGROUND: This clinical trial was registered on Clinical Trials.gov (Registration ID: NCT06209554) and released on 08/01/2024.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:比较使用和不使用牙龈下器械的牙周支持性护理(SPC)患者的牙龈下微生物群,超过2年。
    方法:这项研究是一项随机临床试验,包括62名完成非手术牙周治疗的参与者(50.97±9.26岁;40名女性)。在SPC期间,参与者被随机分配接受口腔预防,仅使用口腔卫生说明(测试)或与龈下器械(对照)结合使用。在SPC基线和3、6、12、18和24个月时,从每个患者的四个部位获得汇集的龈下生物膜样品。实时聚合酶链反应用于对真细菌和目标细菌牙龈卟啉单胞菌进行绝对定量,连翘坦菌,和Denticola密螺旋体.使用广义估计方程分析数据,考虑到个体内部观察的聚类。
    结果:实验组之间在真细菌和目标细菌的平均计数方面没有发现显着差异,以及采样部位的牙周参数。尽管在SPC期间存在细菌计数的显着差异,2年后的所有计数与基线无统计学差异.细菌计数与斑块的存在有关,探查时出血,平均探测深度≥3mm,和随访期。
    结论:SPC有或没有龈下器械可以导致相当的龈下微生物学结果。
    背景:clinicaltrials.gov:NCT01598155(https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT01598155?intr=牙龈上%20control&rank=4#研究记录日期)。
    OBJECTIVE: To compare the subgingival microbiota of patients receiving supportive periodontal care (SPC) with and without subgingival instrumentation, over 2 years.
    METHODS: This study was a randomized clinical trial that included 62 participants (50.97 ± 9.26 years old; 40 females) who completed non-surgical periodontal therapy. Participants were randomly assigned to receive oral prophylaxis with oral hygiene instructions alone (test) or in combination with subgingival instrumentation (control) during SPC. Pooled subgingival biofilm samples were obtained from four sites per patient at SPC baseline and at 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Real-time polymerase chain reaction was used for absolute quantification of Eubacteria and the target bacteria Porphyromonas gingivalis, Tannerella forsythia, and Treponema denticola. Data were analysed using generalized estimating equations, taking into consideration the clustering of observations within individuals.
    RESULTS: No significant differences were found between the experimental groups regarding the mean counts of Eubacteria and target bacteria, as well as the periodontal parameters at the sampled sites. Although significant variability in bacterial counts was present during SPC, all counts after 2 years were not statistically different from those at baseline. Bacterial counts were associated with the presence of plaque, bleeding on probing, mean probing depth ≥3 mm, and follow-up period.
    CONCLUSIONS: SPC with or without subgingival instrumentation can result in comparable subgingival microbiological outcomes.
    BACKGROUND: clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01598155 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT01598155?intr=supragingival%20control&rank=4#study-record-dates).
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:从临床和生化方面评价姜黄素脂质体制剂的包封作用及脂质体凝胶对糖尿病患者牙周缺损的缓释作用。
    方法:将30例糖尿病伴牙周炎患者随机分为3组,10例健康者作为对照组。第I组应用缓释脂质体姜黄素凝胶进行除垢和根平整(SRP)。第二组通过应用姜黄素凝胶进行结垢和根系规划。第III组使用安慰剂凝胶进行缩放和根系规划。第四组(对照组),没有干预。在治疗前和治疗后6周和12周评估以下参数:菌斑指数(PI),牙龈指数(GI),探测深度(PD),临床依恋水平(CAL),肿瘤坏死因子α(TNF-α),白细胞介素1β(IL-1β)和总抗氧化能力(TAC)。
    结果:所有研究组的临床和生化指标均有统计学意义的改善。在比较治疗方式的结果后,I组的改善程度最高,其次是II组,然后是III组.
    结论:缓释脂质体姜黄素凝胶增强了抗氧化能力,降低了炎症介质,并显示出更多的改善糖尿病患者牙周炎治疗的临床结果。
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of entrapment of curcumin within liposomal formulation and the sustained release attitude of the formulated liposomal gel on periodontal defects in diabetic patients in clinical and biochemical terms.
    METHODS: Thirty diabetic patients with periodontitis were randomly assigned to three equal groups and ten healthy participants were assigned as the control group. Group I was subjected to scaling and root planing (SRP) with application of sustained release liposomal curcumin gel. Group II was subjected to scaling and root planning with application of curcumin gel. Group III was subjected to scaling and root planning with application of placebo gel. Group IV (control group), no intervention was done. The following parameters were evaluated before treatment and after 6 and 12 weeks: plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α), interleukin 1 beta (IL-1β) and total antioxidant capacity (TAC).
    RESULTS: All study groups showed improvement in clinical and biochemical parameters that are statistically significant. Upon comparing the results of treatment modalities, the highest improvement was achieved in group I followed by group II then group III.
    CONCLUSIONS: Sustained release liposomal curcumin gel enhanced the antioxidant capacity, decreased the inflammatory mediators and showed more improvement in clinical outcome for treatment of periodontitis in diabetic patients.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:最近的研究表明,残留牙结石的微观结晶颗粒在牙周炎的发病机制中具有一定的作用。这项离体研究的目的是比较单独的结垢和根部平整(SRP)与SRP结合24%乙二胺-四乙酸(EDTA)凝胶在去除拔牙牙结石方面的有效性,并确定最佳时间应用EDTA。
    方法:标本包括32颗拔牙,根结石较重。在每个牙齿的根部表面上制备4毫米直径的部位,然后进行SRP。将EDTA应用于四个定时组:30s;60s;120s;和180s。使用白光(WL)和激光荧光(LF)以40倍放大倍数拍摄显微照片。使用ImageJ分析显微照片。样品也用扫描电子显微镜(SEM)评估。
    结果:SRP后残留结石的平均面积为45%-53%(45.6%±19.6%WL,53.8%±19.7%LF)。SRP后,用EDTA抛光一分钟,将结石减少到只有14%-18%(13.9%±12.5%LF,18.2%±11.1%WL)。使用EDTA超过1分钟显示没有进一步去除结石。SEM显示,通过用EDTA抛光,剩余牙结石的表面发生了改变。
    结论:单独使用SRP或SRP+24%EDTA凝胶无法清除所有结石。SRP单独从根表面去除>60%的牙结石。辅助使用在根表面磨光的24%EDTA凝胶去除SRP后的大部分结石残留。EDTA抛光后剩余的结石表现出明显的形态学外观改变。
    BACKGROUND: Recent studies suggest a role for microscopic crystalline particles of residual dental calculus in the pathogenesis of periodontitis. The purpose of this ex vivo study was to compare the effectiveness of scaling and root planing (SRP) alone versus SRP combined with 24% ethylenediamine-tetra acetic acid (EDTA) gel in removing calculus from extracted teeth and to determine the optimal length of time for application of the EDTA.
    METHODS: Specimens consisted of 32 extracted teeth with heavy root calculus. A 4-mm diameter site was prepared on the root surface of each tooth which then underwent SRP. EDTA was applied to four timed groups: 30 s; 60 s; 120 s; and 180 s. Photomicrographs were taken at 40× magnification using white light (WL) and laser fluorescence (LF). Photomicrographs were analyzed using ImageJ. Specimens were also evaluated with scanning electron microscopy (SEM).
    RESULTS: The mean area of residual calculus after SRP was 45%-53% (45.6% ± 19.6% WL, 53.8% ± 19.7% LF). Burnishing with EDTA for one minute following SRP reduced calculus to only 14%-18% (13.9% ± 12.5% LF, 18.2% ± 11.1% WL). Use of EDTA for greater than 1 min showed no further calculus removal. SEM revealed the surface of remaining calculus was altered by burnishing with EDTA.
    CONCLUSIONS: SRP alone or SRP + 24% EDTA gel failed to remove all calculus. SRP alone removed >60% of calculus from root surfaces. Adjunctive use of 24% EDTA gel burnished on the root surface removed most of the calculus residual after SRP. Calculus remaining after EDTA burnishing exhibited a significantly altered morphologic appearance.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:探讨不同辅助局部治疗联合非手术牙周治疗(NSPT)减少口袋深度(PD)的有效性。获得临床依恋水平(CAL),在系统评价和网络荟萃分析中,2型糖尿病(T2DM)和牙周炎患者的糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)降低。
    方法:在Cochrane数据库中搜索出版物,EMBASE,谷歌学者,MEDLINE,PubMed,opengrey.欧盟,www。
    结果:到2024年5月29日为止,没有语言限制。
    方法:仅包括随机对照试验(RCT)。网络荟萃分析利用频率模型。
    方法:对涉及1224例患者的30项RCT进行的网络荟萃分析显示,短期(2-3个月)和中期(4-6个月),包括他汀类药物或二甲双胍的辅助局部治疗在有/无额外干预措施如光动力和激光治疗(PDT/LT)的情况下,显著优于缩放和根部规划(SRP),植物疗法,多西环素,双膦酸盐,抗生素,防腐剂,或安慰剂用于减少PD和/或获得CAL。从长期来看(>6个月),他汀类药物产生了最显著的额外PD减少和CAL增加,其次是抗生素,与SRP与防腐剂或安慰剂相比。与有/无他汀类药物的SRP相比,仅PDT/LT在短期内显示出明显更大的HbA1c降低。防腐剂,或安慰剂。
    结论:这项研究适度支持,与使用/不使用安慰剂的SRP相比,在NSPT中局部添加二甲双胍或他汀类药物可能会增强PD减少和CAL增加。
    结论:指导临床医生优化辅助治疗,增强2型糖尿病和牙周炎患者的健康。提出了一种战略方法来同时应对系统和口腔健康挑战。
    OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effectiveness of different adjunctive local treatments combined with non-surgical periodontal therapy (NSPT) to reduce pocket depth (PD), gain clinical attachment level (CAL), and/or reduce glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) in individuals with both type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and periodontitis in a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
    METHODS: Publications were searched in Cochrane databases, EMBASE, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, PubMed, opengrey.eu, and www.
    RESULTS: gov up to May 29, 2024 with no language restriction.
    METHODS: Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Network meta-analysis utilized frequentist models.
    METHODS: The network meta-analysis of 30 RCTs involving 1224 patients revealed that, in short-term (2-3 months) and medium-term (4-6 months), adjunctive local treatment involving statins or metformin significantly outperformed scaling and root planning (SRP) with/without additional interventions such as photodynamic and laser therapies (PDT/LT), phytotherapy, doxycycline, bisphosphonates, antibiotics, antiseptics, or placebo for reducing PD and/or gaining CAL. In the long-term (>6 months), statins yielded the most significant additional PD reduction and CAL gain, followed by antibiotics, compared to SRP with antiseptics or placebo. Only PDT/LT demonstrated significantly greater HbA1c reduction in the short term compared to SRP with/without statins, antiseptics, or placebo.
    CONCLUSIONS: This study moderately supports that adding metformin or statins locally to NSPT may enhance PD reduction and CAL gain compared to SRP with/without placebo.
    CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians are guided to optimize adjunctive therapies, enhancing the health of patients with type 2 diabetes and periodontitis. A strategic approach is proposed to tackle systemic and oral health challenges simultaneously.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:本研究旨在比较牙周炎患者牙龈下应用益生菌作为刮除和根面平整(SRP)的辅助药物与单用SRP的疗效。
    方法:诊断为牙周炎的患者,在对侧部位的至少两颗牙齿上探测5-7毫米的口袋深度(PPD),选择进行研究,并随机分配到接受SRP并在牙龈下应用益生菌糊剂的测试组(n=31)和仅接受SRP的对照组(n=31)。在基线和12周后评估两组的临床参数。在基线时在测试组中评估益生菌的活力,第4天和第8天。
    结果:在组内和组间比较中,所有临床参数在基线和12周之间都显示出统计学上的显着差异,在测试组中有更大的改善。微生物学评价显示,试验组平均菌落形成单位(CFUs)在基线时分别为38.39±7.76、7.25±2.72和1.57±1.29,第4天和第8天。平均CFU随着从基线到8天时间间隔的时间增加而显著降低。
    结论:发现益生菌在放置后8天内仍在牙周袋中存活,但是即使在12周时,所有临床参数都有稳定的改善,表明其长期疗效。因此,当与SRP联合使用时,市售益生菌可以证明是治疗牙周炎的廉价方法。
    OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the efficacy of subgingivally applied probiotics as an adjunct to scaling and root planing (SRP) vs SRP alone in patients with periodontitis.
    METHODS: Patients diagnosed with periodontitis, with probing pocket depth (PPD) of 5-7 mm on at least two teeth on contralateral sites, were selected for the study and randomly allocated to the test group (n = 31) who underwent SRP along with subgingival application of probiotic paste and the control group (n = 31) who underwent only SRP. Clinical parameters were evaluated in both groups at baseline and after 12 weeks. The viability of probiotic bacteria was evaluated in the test group at baseline, day 4 and day 8.
    RESULTS: All clinical parameters showed a statistically significant difference between baseline and 12 weeks on intragroup and intergroup comparison, with a greater improvement in the test group. Microbiological evaluation showed that the mean colony-forming units (CFUs) in the test group were 38.39 ± 7.76, 7.25 ± 2.72 and 1.57 ± 1.29 at baseline, day 4 and day 8, respectively. The mean CFUs significantly reduced with an increase in time from baseline to 8-day time interval.
    CONCLUSIONS: It was seen that the probiotic bacteria remained viable in the periodontal pocket for up to 8 days after placement, but stable improvements were seen in all clinical parameters even at 12 weeks, indicating its prolonged efficacy. Thus, commercially available probiotics can prove to be an inexpensive method to treat periodontitis when combined with SRP.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

公众号