Non-surgical periodontal treatment: clinical and microscopic evaluation

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Feser, Gustavo
Data de Publicação: 2018
Outros Autores: Gulino, Mariana, Boccio, Ileana, Dulong, Ivette, Antuña, María Virginia, Quintero, Anabela, Barros, Andrés, Funosas, Esteban
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Revista Científica do CRO-RJ (Online)
Texto Completo: https://cro-rj.org.br/revcientifica/index.php/revista/article/view/8
Resumo: NON SURGICAL PERIODONTAL TREATMENT. CLINICAL AND MICROSCOPIC EVALUATION. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of two combined non-surgical periodontal therapies from an analysis of the treated tooth surface using optical microscope (MO) and scanning electron microscope (MEB).MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a previous study (Funosas et al, SAIO 2009) it was established that dental pieces subjected to root scaling by using Gracey curettes, Sonic Instruments (Titan S®), Magnetorestrictive Ultrasonic Instruments (Cavitron Bobcat®) and Piezoelectric Ultrasound did not show statistically significant differences to the residual calculus observed by optical microscopy (MO), whereas with scanning electron microscopy (MEB) a greater cement detachment was observed in the piezoelectric ultrasound group. Thirty patients were selected with moderate to severe periodontal disease and indicated at least one piece for extraction due to poor prognosis. A clinical study with a split-mouth, randomized, double-blind design was performed. Two combined treatment modalities were compared: Cavitron Bobcat® + completion with Gracey Curettes (G1) and EMS + completion with Gracey curettes (G2). The instrumentation was performed until a smooth surface was obtained and no residual calculus was present, which was verified by a periodontal probe. The extracted pieces were analyzed by MO and MEB. Periodontal variables: Plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (HS), probing pocket depth (PS), clinical insertion level (NIC), gingival recession (RG) were observed before treatment, 3 and 6 months later. The operative time (Tpd) for each method was also analyzed. The results were compared by ANOVA followed by the Tukey test, setting the significance value with p <0.05.show statistically significant quantitative or qualitative variations.RESULTS: IP, HS, PS, NIC performed similarly in both groups. RG determined in mm was for G1 (0,31) and for G2 (0,46). Tpd in minutes per tooth was for G1 (3.21) and for G2 (3.12).CONCLUSIONS: Both treatment modalities favored the resolution of periodontal disease. Piezoelectric instrumentation combined with Gracey curettes produced greater gingival recessions. The surfaces analyzed by MO and MEB did not KEY WORDS: Scalling and root planning, optical and electronic microscopy.
id CRO-1_5f4f6043aacfca43d2d159c3eea940ee
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs3.cro-rj.org.br:article/8
network_acronym_str CRO-1
network_name_str Revista Científica do CRO-RJ (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Non-surgical periodontal treatment: clinical and microscopic evaluationNon-surgical periodontal treatment: clinical and microscopic evaluationScalling and root planning, optical eleandctronic microscopy.NON SURGICAL PERIODONTAL TREATMENT. CLINICAL AND MICROSCOPIC EVALUATION. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of two combined non-surgical periodontal therapies from an analysis of the treated tooth surface using optical microscope (MO) and scanning electron microscope (MEB).MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a previous study (Funosas et al, SAIO 2009) it was established that dental pieces subjected to root scaling by using Gracey curettes, Sonic Instruments (Titan S®), Magnetorestrictive Ultrasonic Instruments (Cavitron Bobcat®) and Piezoelectric Ultrasound did not show statistically significant differences to the residual calculus observed by optical microscopy (MO), whereas with scanning electron microscopy (MEB) a greater cement detachment was observed in the piezoelectric ultrasound group. Thirty patients were selected with moderate to severe periodontal disease and indicated at least one piece for extraction due to poor prognosis. A clinical study with a split-mouth, randomized, double-blind design was performed. Two combined treatment modalities were compared: Cavitron Bobcat® + completion with Gracey Curettes (G1) and EMS + completion with Gracey curettes (G2). The instrumentation was performed until a smooth surface was obtained and no residual calculus was present, which was verified by a periodontal probe. The extracted pieces were analyzed by MO and MEB. Periodontal variables: Plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (HS), probing pocket depth (PS), clinical insertion level (NIC), gingival recession (RG) were observed before treatment, 3 and 6 months later. The operative time (Tpd) for each method was also analyzed. The results were compared by ANOVA followed by the Tukey test, setting the significance value with p <0.05.show statistically significant quantitative or qualitative variations.RESULTS: IP, HS, PS, NIC performed similarly in both groups. RG determined in mm was for G1 (0,31) and for G2 (0,46). Tpd in minutes per tooth was for G1 (3.21) and for G2 (3.12).CONCLUSIONS: Both treatment modalities favored the resolution of periodontal disease. Piezoelectric instrumentation combined with Gracey curettes produced greater gingival recessions. The surfaces analyzed by MO and MEB did not KEY WORDS: Scalling and root planning, optical and electronic microscopy.Rio de Janeiro Dental Journal2018-05-03info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://cro-rj.org.br/revcientifica/index.php/revista/article/view/8Revista Científica do CRO-RJ (Rio de Janeiro Dental Journal); Vol. 3 No. 1: January-April 2018; 54-58Revista Científica do CRO-RJ (Rio de Janeiro Dental Journal); v. 3 n. 1: January-April 2018; 54-582595-47331518-5249reponame:Revista Científica do CRO-RJ (Online)instname:Conselho Regional de Odontologia do Rio de Janeiro (CRO-RJ)instacron:CROporhttps://cro-rj.org.br/revcientifica/index.php/revista/article/view/8/8Copyright (c) 2018 Revista Científica do CRO-RJ (Rio de Janeiro Dental Journal)info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessFeser, GustavoGulino, MarianaBoccio, IleanaDulong, IvetteAntuña, María VirginiaQuintero, AnabelaBarros, AndrésFunosas, Esteban2018-05-04T14:18:45Zoai:ojs3.cro-rj.org.br:article/8Revistahttps://cro-rj.org.br/revcientifica/index.php/revistahttps://cro-rj.org.br/revcientifica/index.php/revista/oairevista.cientifica@cro-rj.org.br || rorefa@terra.com.br2595-47331518-5249opendoar:2018-05-04T14:18:45Revista Científica do CRO-RJ (Online) - Conselho Regional de Odontologia do Rio de Janeiro (CRO-RJ)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Non-surgical periodontal treatment: clinical and microscopic evaluation
Non-surgical periodontal treatment: clinical and microscopic evaluation
title Non-surgical periodontal treatment: clinical and microscopic evaluation
spellingShingle Non-surgical periodontal treatment: clinical and microscopic evaluation
Feser, Gustavo
Scalling and root planning, optical eleandctronic microscopy.
title_short Non-surgical periodontal treatment: clinical and microscopic evaluation
title_full Non-surgical periodontal treatment: clinical and microscopic evaluation
title_fullStr Non-surgical periodontal treatment: clinical and microscopic evaluation
title_full_unstemmed Non-surgical periodontal treatment: clinical and microscopic evaluation
title_sort Non-surgical periodontal treatment: clinical and microscopic evaluation
author Feser, Gustavo
author_facet Feser, Gustavo
Gulino, Mariana
Boccio, Ileana
Dulong, Ivette
Antuña, María Virginia
Quintero, Anabela
Barros, Andrés
Funosas, Esteban
author_role author
author2 Gulino, Mariana
Boccio, Ileana
Dulong, Ivette
Antuña, María Virginia
Quintero, Anabela
Barros, Andrés
Funosas, Esteban
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Feser, Gustavo
Gulino, Mariana
Boccio, Ileana
Dulong, Ivette
Antuña, María Virginia
Quintero, Anabela
Barros, Andrés
Funosas, Esteban
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Scalling and root planning, optical eleandctronic microscopy.
topic Scalling and root planning, optical eleandctronic microscopy.
description NON SURGICAL PERIODONTAL TREATMENT. CLINICAL AND MICROSCOPIC EVALUATION. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of two combined non-surgical periodontal therapies from an analysis of the treated tooth surface using optical microscope (MO) and scanning electron microscope (MEB).MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a previous study (Funosas et al, SAIO 2009) it was established that dental pieces subjected to root scaling by using Gracey curettes, Sonic Instruments (Titan S®), Magnetorestrictive Ultrasonic Instruments (Cavitron Bobcat®) and Piezoelectric Ultrasound did not show statistically significant differences to the residual calculus observed by optical microscopy (MO), whereas with scanning electron microscopy (MEB) a greater cement detachment was observed in the piezoelectric ultrasound group. Thirty patients were selected with moderate to severe periodontal disease and indicated at least one piece for extraction due to poor prognosis. A clinical study with a split-mouth, randomized, double-blind design was performed. Two combined treatment modalities were compared: Cavitron Bobcat® + completion with Gracey Curettes (G1) and EMS + completion with Gracey curettes (G2). The instrumentation was performed until a smooth surface was obtained and no residual calculus was present, which was verified by a periodontal probe. The extracted pieces were analyzed by MO and MEB. Periodontal variables: Plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (HS), probing pocket depth (PS), clinical insertion level (NIC), gingival recession (RG) were observed before treatment, 3 and 6 months later. The operative time (Tpd) for each method was also analyzed. The results were compared by ANOVA followed by the Tukey test, setting the significance value with p <0.05.show statistically significant quantitative or qualitative variations.RESULTS: IP, HS, PS, NIC performed similarly in both groups. RG determined in mm was for G1 (0,31) and for G2 (0,46). Tpd in minutes per tooth was for G1 (3.21) and for G2 (3.12).CONCLUSIONS: Both treatment modalities favored the resolution of periodontal disease. Piezoelectric instrumentation combined with Gracey curettes produced greater gingival recessions. The surfaces analyzed by MO and MEB did not KEY WORDS: Scalling and root planning, optical and electronic microscopy.
publishDate 2018
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2018-05-03
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://cro-rj.org.br/revcientifica/index.php/revista/article/view/8
url https://cro-rj.org.br/revcientifica/index.php/revista/article/view/8
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://cro-rj.org.br/revcientifica/index.php/revista/article/view/8/8
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2018 Revista Científica do CRO-RJ (Rio de Janeiro Dental Journal)
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2018 Revista Científica do CRO-RJ (Rio de Janeiro Dental Journal)
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Rio de Janeiro Dental Journal
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Rio de Janeiro Dental Journal
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista Científica do CRO-RJ (Rio de Janeiro Dental Journal); Vol. 3 No. 1: January-April 2018; 54-58
Revista Científica do CRO-RJ (Rio de Janeiro Dental Journal); v. 3 n. 1: January-April 2018; 54-58
2595-4733
1518-5249
reponame:Revista Científica do CRO-RJ (Online)
instname:Conselho Regional de Odontologia do Rio de Janeiro (CRO-RJ)
instacron:CRO
instname_str Conselho Regional de Odontologia do Rio de Janeiro (CRO-RJ)
instacron_str CRO
institution CRO
reponame_str Revista Científica do CRO-RJ (Online)
collection Revista Científica do CRO-RJ (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista Científica do CRO-RJ (Online) - Conselho Regional de Odontologia do Rio de Janeiro (CRO-RJ)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv revista.cientifica@cro-rj.org.br || rorefa@terra.com.br
_version_ 1797042305618673664