IADR Abstract Archives
EES as Adjuvant in Non-Surgical Periodontal Treatment in Chronic Periodontitis
Objectives: Assess the efectiveness of electrolyzed superoxidized solution (ESS) in a mouthwash and gel as a coadjuvant in dental scaling and root planing (SRP).
Methods: This study was performed with 16 patients diagnosed with chronic periodontal disease. The initial phase of the periodontal treatment was explained and patients signed written informed consent before being treated. A clinical file with a complete clinical history including personal data, medical history and a periodontogram was created for each patient. Patients were divided into three groups: the first control group received treatment with ESS; the second group was given ESS as a mouthwash; and the third group ESS as a mouthwash and gel. Information was recorded in a database using Microsoft Excel 2010.
Probing depth, gingival index (GI) and plaque index (PI) were determined before and after performing the initial phase of periodontal treatment; this is SRP according to Lindhe et al., 2003. The GI by Silness and Loe (1964) was applied; this is classified into 4 criteria from 0 to 3. For the PI the method by Theilade et al. 1966 with a score of 0 to 3 was used.
Results: Mean initial and final PI with SRP alone, SRP + ESS in mouthwash and SRP + ESS in mouthwash and gel. In all three groups, a reduction in the final PI was observed in comparison to the initial PI, with the SRP + ESS group with mouthwash and gel having the lowest final PI levels. Mean initial and final GI with the three treatment modalities, SRP alone, SRP + ESS in mouthwash, and SRP + ESS in mouthwash and gel. A reduction in the final GI was observed in the three groups in comparison to the initial GI with marginal differences when the final GI of the three groups was compared. The SRP + ESS in mouthwash and gel group had the lowest final GI levels.
Conclusions: A reduction in the final PI was observed in comparison to the initial PI in all three groups (P <0.05) with the SRP + ESS with mouthwash and gel group having the lowest final PI (P<0.000).
Methods: This study was performed with 16 patients diagnosed with chronic periodontal disease. The initial phase of the periodontal treatment was explained and patients signed written informed consent before being treated. A clinical file with a complete clinical history including personal data, medical history and a periodontogram was created for each patient. Patients were divided into three groups: the first control group received treatment with ESS; the second group was given ESS as a mouthwash; and the third group ESS as a mouthwash and gel. Information was recorded in a database using Microsoft Excel 2010.
Probing depth, gingival index (GI) and plaque index (PI) were determined before and after performing the initial phase of periodontal treatment; this is SRP according to Lindhe et al., 2003. The GI by Silness and Loe (1964) was applied; this is classified into 4 criteria from 0 to 3. For the PI the method by Theilade et al. 1966 with a score of 0 to 3 was used.
Results: Mean initial and final PI with SRP alone, SRP + ESS in mouthwash and SRP + ESS in mouthwash and gel. In all three groups, a reduction in the final PI was observed in comparison to the initial PI, with the SRP + ESS group with mouthwash and gel having the lowest final PI levels. Mean initial and final GI with the three treatment modalities, SRP alone, SRP + ESS in mouthwash, and SRP + ESS in mouthwash and gel. A reduction in the final GI was observed in the three groups in comparison to the initial GI with marginal differences when the final GI of the three groups was compared. The SRP + ESS in mouthwash and gel group had the lowest final GI levels.
Conclusions: A reduction in the final PI was observed in comparison to the initial PI in all three groups (P <0.05) with the SRP + ESS with mouthwash and gel group having the lowest final PI (P<0.000).
IMAGES
2955119_File000000.jpg
2955119_File000001.jpg
2955119_File000000.jpg
2955119_File000001.jpg