The Efficacy of Adjunctive Aids in Periodontal Maintenance Therapy: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of adjunctive aids to scaling and root planing (SRP) on clinical outcomes in treating periodontal patients included in regular periodontal maintenance programs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The electronic databases MEDLINE (Pubmed), EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched for relevant articles published up to 1st January, 2020. Randomised controlled clinical trials of SRP with or without the use of adjuncts and published in English were included. A meta-analysis using the random-effects model was performed on the selected qualifying articles. RESULTS: Nineteen studies were included in the systematic review and sixteen in the meta-analysis. The overall effect of adjunctive aids was statistically significant for reduction in probing depth (PD) (0.376 mm, 95% CI [0.144 to 0.609]) and clinical attachment level (CAL) gain (0.207 mm, 95% CI [0.0728 to 0.340]). No statistically significant differences were observed for changes in bleeding on probing (BOP) (p > 0.05). Among the different adjuncts, statistically significant positive effects were demonstrated for adjunctive photodynamic therapy (PD reduction 0.908 mm, 95% CI [0.227 to 1.589] and CAL change (0.457 mm, 95% CI [0.133 to 0.782]) and tetracycline fibers (PD reduction 0.534 mm, 95% CI [0.290 to 0.778] and CAL gain 0.280 mm, 95% CI [0.0391 to 0.521]). CONCLUSIONS: Despite high heterogeneity of the investigated data, based on the findings of a current systematic review, adjunctive aids (in particular, photodynamic therapy and tetracycline fibers) combined with SRP provide statistically significant clinical benefits compared to SRP alone. Due to the large number of included studies with high risk of bias, future studies should be based on adequate methodological procedures to improve the overall quality of reporting and to reduce the risk of bias.

The determination of pH of peri-implant crevicular fluid around one-piece and two-piece dental implants: A pilot study.

There are two main groups of screw-type dental implant designs: one-piece and two-piece implants. Although success rates of both of these types of implants are high, none of them avoid complications, of which the most common are peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. Current clinical diagnostic parameters are relatively noninvasive and cost-efficient; however, they are often not sensitive enough and fail to determine the activity of inflammation. The purpose of this study is to determine pH of peri-implant crevicular fluid (PICF) around one-piece and two-piece implants and pH of gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) around healthy teeth and to find out if our suggested method could function accurately for determination of pH of PICF and GCF. Thermo Fisher Scientific™ Orion™ 9863BN glass microelectrode was used to determine pH of PICF around 29 one-piece (ROOTT, TRATE AG) and 29 two-piece implants (multiple manufacturers) and pH of GCF around 29 healthy teeth. pH of PICF around two-piece implants was more acidic (P < 0.001). Average pH around one-piece implants was 6.46 and around two-piece implants was 6.15. Mean pH of GCF was 6.64. pH of PICF in women around two-piece implants was more alkaline (P < 0.05); no difference was found in control and one-piece implant groups. There was no statistically significant correlation found between age and pH of PICF and GFC. Design of dental implants has an impact on pH of PICF. Glass microelectrode is an appropriate tool for accurate determination of pH in PICF.