Efficacy of alternative or additional methods to professional mechanical plaque removal during supportive periodontal therapy: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Aims To systematically review the literature addressing the following focused questions: “What is the efficacy of either (#1) alternative or (#2) additional methods to professional mechanical plaque removal (PMPR) on progression of attachment loss during supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) in perio...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of clinical periodontology Vol. 47; no. S22; pp. 144 - 154
Main Authors Trombelli, Leonardo, Farina, Roberto, Pollard, Alexander, Claydon, Nicholas, Franceschetti, Giovanni, Khan, Iftekhar, West, Nicola
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.07.2020
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Aims To systematically review the literature addressing the following focused questions: “What is the efficacy of either (#1) alternative or (#2) additional methods to professional mechanical plaque removal (PMPR) on progression of attachment loss during supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) in periodontitis patients?”. Methods A systematic search for randomized clinical trials was performed. Change in clinical attachment level (CAL) from baseline was the primary outcome. Results Routine PMPR performed with either a combination of ultrasonic/hand instruments or Er:Yag laser showed similarly effective in preventing CAL loss. Moreover, a routine SPT regimen based on PMPR led to stability of CAL irrespective of a daily sub‐antimicrobial doxycycline dose (SDD). Finally, an adjunctive photodynamic therapy (PDT) did not enhance the magnitude of CAL gain when sites with probing depth ≥4 mm were repeatedly treated. After pooling all data, the results of the meta‐analysis showed no statistical differences in CAL change from baseline: mean overall CAL change was −0.233 mm (95% confidence interval: −1.065, 0.598; p = .351). Conclusions Weak evidence indicate that in treated periodontitis patients enrolled in a 3–4 month SPT based on PMPR, Er:Yag laser (as alternative), SDD and PDT (as additional) do not produce a greater clinical effect on periodontal conditions compared to PMPR.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ObjectType-Undefined-3
ISSN:0303-6979
1600-051X
DOI:10.1111/jcpe.13269