ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of hand and ultrasonic scaling and to evaluate the surface roughness on the root surface of periodontally involved teeth using a scanning electron microscope. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A sample of 90 single-rooted teeth with a hopeless prognosis was selected for the study and divided into three separate groups. Group I consist of no treatment. In Group II, hand scaling was done using Gracey curettes, and in Group III, ultrasonic scaling was done. The teeth were then extracted and fixed in 10% formaldehyde solution for 24-48 hours and subjected to scanning electron microscopic (SEM) evaluation. RESULTS: The SEM analysis revealed that the remaining calculus index was found to be similar in the ultrasonic group and the hand scaling group, whereas the surface roughness was found to be the least in the ultrasonic group. CONCLUSIONS: Hand instrumentation has resulted in more surface roughness as compared to ultrasonic instruments.
Subject(s)
Ultrasonic Therapy , Ultrasonics , Root Planing , Microscopy, Electron, Scanning , Electrons , Equipment Design , Tooth Root/diagnostic imaging , Tooth Root/ultrastructureABSTRACT
Background: Essential oils (EOs) have a considerable amount of therapeutic and preventive effect in treating dental diseases due to their wider potential as antibacterial and anti-inflammatory agents. EOs like virgin coconut oil, eucalyptus oil, peppermint oil thyme oil, and clove oil, when used in combination, may further have enhanced antimicrobial effects. However, limited information exists on the synergistic effect of these oils when used in combination, especially on the primary periodontal pathogen Porphyromonas gingivalis. Aim: The current study aims to compare the antimicrobial efficacy of commercially available EO on the periodontal pathogen, P. gingivalis, in comparison to chlorhexidine (CHX). Materials and Methods: Antimicrobial efficacy of EO and CHX was assessed at various concentrations against the periodontal pathogen P. gingivalis, by evaluating the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC). Results: P. gingivalis was seen to be sensitive at a MIC of 100 µg/ml and 50 µg/ml concentration of the EO, which is regarded as the MIC of EO against P. gingivalis and CHX effectively inhibited microbial growth at 0.4 µg/ml. Conclusion: A combination of EOs possesses a potent antibacterial activity against P. gingivalis, and the antibacterial efficacy increases with increasing concentration of EOs.
