Microbiological and clinical evaluation of ultrasonic debridement with/without erythritol air polishing during supportive periodontal therapy in arches with full-arch fixed implant-supported prostheses: protocol for a randomised controlled trial

IntroductionImplant-supported prostheses are often successfully used in edentulous patients. However, the incidences of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis increase over time. The accumulation of pathogenic bacteria adjacent to prostheses can induce peri-implant disease. Plaque removal is recommended to prevent and manage peri-implant diseases. The purpose of this study is to compare the plaque removal efficacy of ultrasonic debridement with/without erythritol air-polishing powder around implants and bridges in patients with full-arch fixed implant-supported prostheses as well as the effects of these two methods on the rates of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis, and the submucosal microbiota composition over 5 years in patients undergoing supportive periodontal therapy.Methods and analysisWe plan to enrol 10 edentulous (maxilla and/or mandible) patients seeking full-arch fixed implant-supported prostheses. The study will use a split-mouth model in which contralateral quadrants are randomly assigned to two groups. Group 1: one contralateral quadrant of full-arch fixed implant-supported prostheses will undergo ultrasonic debridement combined with erythritol air-polishing powder. Group 2: a separate contralateral quadrant of full-arch fixed implant-supported prostheses will undergo ultrasonic debridement. The 5-year trial will involve a total of 10 re-examinations per participant. The mucosal conditions around the implants will be recorded at 6-month intervals after restoration. Peri-implant submucosal plaque will be collected at each re-examination, and the bacterial flora will be analysed by 16s ribosomal RNA gene sequencing. X-ray examinations will be conducted at 12-month intervals to evaluate the marginal bone level around implants.Ethics and disseminationThis prospective single-centre, randomised controlled trial (PKUSSIRB-202054045) has been approved by the Ethics Committee of Stomatology School and Hospital of Peking University. Data will be registered with the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. Additionally, we will disseminate the results via publication in scientific journals.Trial registration numberChiCTR-2000032431.

Study of the Antimicrobial Effect of an Ethanolic Extract of Propolis in Periodontal Disease

Periodontal disease encompasses gingivitis and periodontitis and is one of the most common chronic infections in the adult population. This study aimed to evaluate the influence of Spanish propolis extract (EEP) on the effect of the clinical and microbiological parameters as an adjuvant to scaling and root planning in patients undergoing supportive periodontal therapy (SPT). Forty chronic periodontitis patients were randomly assigned into two groups for the treatment. In the control group (n = 20), the sites were treated by scaling and root planing followed by gingival irrigation with physiological saline and in the test group (n = 20), the sites were treated by scaling and root planing followed by subgingival placement of EEP. At baseline (BL), bleeding on probing positive (BOP+) sites with probing pocket (PPD) ≥ 4 mm were defined as study sites. Plaque index, PPD, BOP, clinical attachment level (CAL), and subgingival plaque were evaluated at BL and 1 month later. The results showed a significant clinical improvement (p < 0.05) in the PPD, CAL and BOP+ comparing them with BL and one month after the periodontal treatment and a significant reduction (p < 0.05) for Tannerella forsythensis, Porphyromonas gingivalis, Prevotella intermedia and Treponema denticola in both groups. In addition, the improvement of clinical parameters was observed with subgingival use of EEP and also statistically significant differences between groups were observed (p < 0.05) such as reductions of BOP+ % and reduced counts of T. forsythensis and P. gingivalis, considered as the “key pathogens” for the periodontal diseases. Our results suggest prophylactic and therapeutic potential for EEP against periodontal diseases, improving clinical parameters, reducing gingival bleeding and decreasing bacterial counts of T. forsythensis and P. gingivalis. The subgingival use of EEP represents a promising modality as an adjuvant in periodontal therapy to avoid microbial resistance and other adverse effects.

The Associations of Periodontopathic Bacteria and Oral Candida with Periodontal Inflamed Surface Area in Older Adults Receiving Supportive Periodontal Therapy

The periodontal inflamed surface area (PISA) has been proposed for assessment of the total periodontal inflammatory status in people with periodontitis. This study was performed to investigate the associations of periodontopathic bacteria and candida with PISA in older people. We enrolled 100 patients aged ≥ 60 years who visited Hiroshima University Hospital. PISA and periodontal epithelial surface area (PESA) were calculated in each patient. Oral rinse samples were collected for DNA extraction. Periodontopathic bacteria and candida were detected by polymerase chain reaction. The mean values of PISA and PESA were significantly greater in T.forsythia-positive patients than in T.forsythia-negative patients. T.forsythia/C. albicans double-positive patients exhibited significantly greater PISA values than did non-double-positive patients. Additionally, PISA values were significantly greater in T. forsythia//T. denticola/C. albicans triple-positive patients than in T. forsythia//T. denticola/C. albicans non-triple-positive patients (p = 0.02). Propensity score-matching was performed between periodontopathic bacteria-positive and -negative patients using propensity scores generated from clinical factors. Importantly, T.forsythia/T. denticola double-positive patients exhibited significantly greater PISA values than non-double-positive patients among 72 propensity score-matched patients. Our preliminary results highlight the importance of the presence of T.forsythia and T. denticola for periodontal inflammation severity in older Japanese people.

Results of an experimental study of subgingival cleaning effectiveness in the furcation area

Background Sufficient biofilm removal in the furcation area (FA) is a major challenge in the clinical practice of supportive periodontal therapy. The aim of the present experimental study was to simulate subgingival cleaning of the FA using a powered scaler (sonic scaler (AIR), ultrasonic scaler (US)) for conventional mechanical debridement versus two air polishing with nonabrasive powder (LAPA-1: glycine powder, LAPA-2: erythritol powder) and different nozzles for supra-/subgingival cleaning for each device. Methods Seven trained and calibrated operators with ≥ 2 years each of professional experience in treating periodontitis used the instruments to clean 3D-printed replicas of six molars with through-and-through FA (four 3-rooted and two 2-rooted teeth) in a manikin head. AIR and US were used in the control group; air polishing instruments were used in the test group. For reproducible evaluation, the test teeth were separated vertically into two or three parts, illuminated with ultraviolet light, photographed and evaluated planimetrically. Treatment time (TrT, in s) and relative cleaning efficacy (RCE, in %) were measured. Results Overall, 3-rooted molars (RCE in the entire FA, 23.19 ± 20.98%) could be cleaned significantly less effectively than 2-rooted molars (53.04 ± 28.45%, p < 0.001), regardless of the instrument used. In the cleaning of the entire FA, significantly higher RCE values were achieved with conventional mechanical debridement (AIR/US: 46.04 ± 25.96%/39.63 ± 22.02%; AIR vs. US: p > 0.05) than with air polishing (LAPA-1/LAPA-2: 34.06 ± 29.48%/17.09 ± 18.85%; LAPA-1 vs. LAPA-2: p < 0.001) regardless of whether a supra- or subgingival cleaning nozzle used (p < 0.001). Only LAPA-1 with a subgingival nozzle showed RCE values comparable to those of US (41.07 ± 28.95% vs. 39.63 ± 22.02%, p > 0.05). TrT was longest for US (299.40 ± 120.69 s) and shortest for LAPA-1 with a supragingival nozzle (129.67 ± 60.92 s, p < 0.001). Conclusions All of the examined instruments were effective to some degree in removing the simulated biofilm from the FA, but they differed substantially in cleaning efficacy. Only one air polishing device (LAPA-1) with a rigid subgingival nozzle was able to achieve RCE values similar to those of US. The current investigation confirmed that conventional mechanical debridement with powered scalers were most effective, but treatment took longer with these devices than air polishing.

Detection of Salivary miRNAs That Predict Chronic Periodontitis Progression: A Cohort Study

The aim of this two-year cohort study was to investigate salivary microRNAs (miRNAs) that predict periodontitis progression. A total of 120 patients who underwent supportive periodontal therapy were recruited. Unstimulated whole saliva was collected at baseline. Two years later, 44 patients were followed up (median age, 67.1 years) and divided into two groups: progression group (n = 22), with one or more sites with clinical attachment level (CAL) progression (>3 mm compared with baseline) or tooth extraction due to periodontitis progression; and the control group (n = 22), which did not exhibit CAL progression. In the microarray analysis of salivary miRNAs, hsa-miR-5571-5p, hsa-miR-17-3p, hsa-let-7f-5p, hsa-miR-4724-3p, hsa-miR-99a-5p, hsa-miR-200a-3p, hsa-miR-28-5p, hsa-miR-320d, and hsa-miR-31-5p showed fold change values <0.5 or ≥2.0 in the progression group compared with the control group (p < 0.05). On receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, areas under the curves of hsa-miR-5571-5p, hsa-let-7f-5p, hsa-miR-99a-5p, hsa-miR-28-5p, and hsa-miR-320d were >0.7, indicating fair discrimination power. The expressions of salivary hsa-miR-5571-5p, hsa-let-7f-5p, hsa-miR-99a-5p, hsa-miR-28-5p, and hsa-miR-320d were associated with periodontitis progression in patients with chronic periodontitis. These salivary miRNAs may be new biomarkers for progression of periodontitis, and monitoring them may contribute to new diagnostics and precision medicine for periodontitis.

Can Supportive Periodontal Therapy Curbe the Surge in COVID-19?

The advent of new variations and the outbreak of pandemic COVID-19 has pushed research among global health professionals to limit the spread of the coronavirus through periodically updated norms and standards of preventive treatment. Dentists have been limited in their practice to emergency care since 2019, as salivary droplets and infectious aerosols from asymptomatic carriers can cross, contaminate the environment. Exaggerated immune responses in patients with poor dental hygiene act as a double-edged sword, manifesting clinically as increased periodontal pockets degrading the tooth supporting tissues, tooth mobility, and tooth loss. SARS- CoV 2 has been discovered in the dental biofilm of infected individuals, according to recent research. Deep periodontal pockets have been identified as a favorable niche for viral survival. This article covers some current study updates and highlights the significance of educating the public, particularly the older population, about maintaining good oral hygiene and minimizing COVID-19 transmission through supportive periodontal treatments.

Probiotic therapy for periodontal and peri-implant health – silver bullet or sham?

Probiotics are thought to be beneficial microbes that influence health-related outcomes through host immunomodulation and modulation of the bacteriome. Its reported success in the treatment of gastrointestinal disorders has led to further research on its potential applicability within the dental field due to similarities such as a polymicrobial aetiology and disease associated microbial-shifts. Although the literature is replete with studies demonstrating its efficacy, the use of probiotics in dentistry continues to polarise opinion. Here, we explore the evidence for probiotics and its effect on periodontal and peri-implant health. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were systemically searched from June 2010 to June 2020 based on a formulated search strategy. Of 1,956 potentially relevant articles, we selected 27 double-blinded randomised clinical trials in the areas of gingivitis, periodontitis, residual pockets during supportive periodontal therapy, and peri-implant diseases, and reviewed their efficacy in these clinical situations. We observed substantial variation in treatment results and protocols between studies. Overall, the evidence for probiotic therapy for periodontal and peri-implant health appears unconvincing. The scarcity of trials with adequate power and follow-up precludes any meaningful clinical recommendations. Thus, the routine use of probiotics for these purposes are currently unsubstantiated. Further multi-centre trials encompassing a standardised investigation on the most promising strains and administration methods, with longer observation times are required to confirm the benefits of probiotic therapy for these applications.