Periodontal status in post-liver transplantation patients: 10 years of follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the current (t1) periodontal status of post-liver transplantation patients to their status 10 years earlier (t0). METHOD AND MATERIALS: Seventeen patients 45 to 71 years of age who were evaluated approximately 10 years previously were enrolled in the study. All subjects had undergone a liver transplantation 1 to 10 years prior to the initial examination (t0). Clinical and radiographic parameters were recorded for the Ramfjord Index teeth and compared between t0 and t1, including Plaque Index (PI), Gingival Index (GI), probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), and gingival overgrowth (GO). Bone loss was measured on digitized images of panoramic radiographs. RESULTS: Mean PI, GI, CAL, and GO were slightly lower at t1 than at t0; however, these differences were not statistically significant (P > .05, Student t test for paired observations). The mean PD was reduced at t1 (2.43 ± 0.18 mm) compared with t0 (3.35 ± 0.22 mm), which was statistically significant (P = .001, Student t test for paired observations). To the contrary, the mean radiographic bone loss at t1 was higher than at t0 (5.61 vs 4.48 mm, respectively), which was also statistically significant (P = .017). Tooth loss was observed in some of these patients, ranging from 0 to 4 during the 10 years of follow-up, which amounted to an annual rate of 0.24 teeth per patient. CONCLUSION: Post-liver transplantation patients maintained stable clinical periodontal parameters during a 10-year period; however, some radiographic bone loss occurred during this time.

Multiple applications of flurbiprofen and chlorhexidine chips in patients with chronic periodontitis: a randomized, double blind, parallel, 2-arms clinical trial.

AIM: The aim of the present randomized, double blind, parallel, 2-arm clinical study was to examine the safety and efficacy of frequent applications of chlorhexidine chip (CHX) and flurbiprofen chip (FBP) in patients with chronic periodontitis. METHODS: Sixty patients were randomized into CHX and FBP groups. Following OHI and scaling and root planing (SRP), baseline pocket depth (PD) measurements, gingival recession and bleeding on probing (BOP) were performed and repeated at week 4 and 8. The assigned chip was placed at weeks 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7. RESULTS: Mean PD reduction in the CHX group was 2.08 mm (7.17 to 5.09, p < 0.0001). Mean PD reduction in the FBP group was 2.27 mm (6.72 to 4.45, p < 0.0001). Ninety-seven percentage and 95% of these sites exhibited PD reduction ≥1 mm, while 38% and 34% of the sites exhibited PD ≥3 mm (FBP and CHX, respectively). Clinical attachment level gain (1.66 and 1.95 mm, respectively) was statistically significant (p < 0.0001). Baseline BOP dropped from 98% and 100% to 24% and 30% for the CHX and FBP groups, respectively (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Frequent applications of CHX and FBP chips resulted in a significant improvement in the periodontal condition in these sites. Furthermore studies will be required to compare this new treatment regimen to SRP or SRP with single chip application.