Microbiological and host-derived biomarker evaluation following non-surgical periodontal therapy with short-term administration of systemic antimicrobials: secondary outcomes of an RCT.

Nonsurgical periodontal therapy with adjunctive use of systemic antimicrobials (for 7-14 days) showed improved clinical, microbiological and immunological results over the mechanical protocol alone. Considering the increasing risk for antimicrobial resistance with longer antibiotic regimes, it is important to establish the optimal antibiotic protocol with a maximum antimicrobial benefit and minimum risk for adverse effects. The aim of the study was to evaluate the microbiological and inflammatory outcomes 12-months after a 3-/7-day systemic antibiotic protocol [amoxicillin (AMX) + metronidazole (MET)] adjunctive to subgingival debridement in severe periodontitis compared to mechanical treatment alone. From the initially treated 102 patients, 75 subjects (Placebo group: n = 26; 3-day AMX + MET group: n = 24; 7-day AMX + MET group: n = 25) completed the 12-month examination. Clinical parameters, eight periodontal pathogens and inflammatory markers were determined at baseline and 3-, 6-, 12-months after therapy using real-time PCR and ELISA respectively. After 6 months, several periodontopathogens were significantly more reduced in the two antibiotic groups compared to placebo (p < 0.05). After 1 year, both antibiotic protocols showed significant reductions and detection of the keystone pathogen P. gingivalis compared to placebo. Antibiotic protocols, smoking, disease severity, baseline-BOP, -CAL and -IL-1β, as well as detection of T. denticola at 12-months significantly influenced the residual number of deep sites. The present data indicate that the systemic use of both short and longer antibiotic protocols (AMX + MET) adjunctive to nonsurgical periodontal therapy lead to higher microbiological improvements compared to subgingival debridement alone. The two investigated antibiotic protocols led to comparable microbiological and inflammatory results

Primary prevention of periodontitis: managing gingivitis.

Periodontitis is a ubiquitous and irreversible inflammatory condition and represents a significant public health burden. Severe periodontitis affects over 11% of adults, is a major cause of tooth loss impacting negatively upon speech, nutrition, quality of life and self-esteem, and has systemic inflammatory consequences. Periodontitis is preventable and treatment leads to reduced rates of tooth loss and improved quality of life. However, successful treatment necessitates behaviour change in patients to address lifestyle risk factors (e.g. smoking) and, most importantly, to attain and sustain high standards of daily plaque removal, lifelong. While mechanical plaque removal remains the bedrock of successful periodontal disease management, in high-risk patients it appears that the critical threshold for plaque accumulation to trigger periodontitis is low, and such patients may benefit from adjunctive agents for primary prevention of periodontitis. AIM: The aims of this working group were to systematically review the evidence for primary prevention of periodontitis by preventing gingivitis via four approaches: 1) the efficacy of mechanical self-administered plaque control regimes; 2) the efficacy of self-administered inter-dental mechanical plaque control; 3) the efficacy of adjunctive chemical plaque control; and 4) anti-inflammatory (sole or adjunctive) approaches. METHODS: Two meta-reviews (mechanical plaque removal) and two traditional systematic reviews (chemical plaque control/anti-inflammatory agents) formed the basis of this consensus. RESULTS: Data support the belief that professionally administered plaque control significantly improves gingival inflammation and lowers plaque scores, with some evidence that reinforcement of oral hygiene provides further benefit. Re-chargeable power toothbrushes provide small but statistically significant additional reductions in gingival inflammation and plaque levels. Flossing cannot be recommended other than for sites of gingival and periodontal health, where inter-dental brushes (IDBs) will not pass through the interproximal area without trauma. Otherwise, IDBs are the device of choice for interproximal plaque removal. Use of local or systemic anti-inflammatory agents in the management of gingivitis has no robust evidence base. We support the almost universal recommendations that all people should brush their teeth twice a day for at least 2 min. with fluoridated dentifrice. Expert opinion is that for periodontitis patients 2 min. is likely to be insufficient, especially when considering the need for additional use of inter-dental cleaning devices. In patients with gingivitis once daily inter-dental cleaning is recommended and the adjunctive use of chemical plaque control agents offers advantages in this group

Primary prevention of periodontitis: managing gingivitis

Periodontitis is a ubiquitous and irreversible inflammatory condition and represents a significant public health burden. Severe periodontitis affects over 11% of adults, is a major cause of tooth loss impacting negatively upon speech, nutrition, quality of life and self-esteem, and has systemic inflammatory consequences. Periodontitis is preventable and treatment leads to reduced rates of tooth loss and improved quality of life. However, successful treatment necessitates behaviour change in patients to address lifestyle risk factors (e.g. smoking) and, most importantly, to attain and sustain high standards of daily plaque removal, lifelong. While mechanical plaque removal remains the bedrock of successful periodontal disease management, in high-risk patients it appears that the critical threshold for plaque accumulation to trigger periodontitis is low, and such patients may benefit from adjunctive agents for primary prevention of periodontitis. Aim The aims of this working group were to systematically review the evidence for primary prevention of periodontitis by preventing gingivitis via four approaches: 1) the efficacy of mechanical self-administered plaque control regimes; 2) the efficacy of self-administered inter-dental mechanical plaque control; 3) the efficacy of adjunctive chemical plaque control; and 4) anti-inflammatory (sole or adjunctive) approaches. Methods Two meta-reviews (mechanical plaque removal) and two traditional systematic reviews (chemical plaque control/anti-inflammatory agents) formed the basis of this consensus. Results Data support the belief that professionally administered plaque control significantly improves gingival inflammation and lowers plaque scores, with some evidence that reinforcement of oral hygiene provides further benefit. Re-chargeable power toothbrushes provide small but statistically significant additional reductions in gingival inflammation and plaque levels. Flossing cannot be recommended other than for sites of gingival and periodontal health, where inter-dental brushes (IDBs) will not pass through the interproximal area without trauma. Otherwise, IDBs are the device of choice for interproximal plaque removal. Use of local or systemic anti-inflammatory agents in the management of gingivitis has no robust evidence base. We support the almost universal recommendations that all people should brush their teeth twice a day for at least 2 min. with fluoridated dentifrice. Expert opinion is that for periodontitis patients 2 min. is likely to be insufficient, especially when considering the need for additional use of inter-dental cleaning devices. In patients with gingivitis once daily inter-dental cleaning is recommended and the adjunctive use of chemical plaque control agents offers advantages in this group

Primary prevention of periodontitis: Managing gingivitis

Periodontitis is a ubiquitous and irreversible inflammatory condition and represents a significant public health burden. Severe periodontitis affects over 11% of adults, is a major cause of tooth loss impacting negatively upon speech, nutrition, quality of life and self-esteem, and has systemic inflammatory consequences. Periodontitis is preventable and treatment leads to reduced rates of tooth loss and improved quality of life. However, successful treatment necessitates behaviour change in patients to address lifestyle risk factors (e.g. smoking) and, most importantly, to attain and sustain high standards of daily plaque removal, lifelong. While mechanical plaque removal remains the bedrock of successful periodontal disease management, in high-risk patients it appears that the critical threshold for plaque accumulation to trigger periodontitis is low, and such patients may benefit from adjunctive agents for primary prevention of periodontitis. Aim The aims of this working group were to systematically review the evidence for primary prevention of periodontitis by preventing gingivitis via four approaches: 1) the efficacy of mechanical self-administered plaque control regimes; 2) the efficacy of self-administered inter-dental mechanical plaque control; 3) the efficacy of adjunctive chemical plaque control; and 4) anti-inflammatory (sole or adjunctive) approaches. Methods Two meta-reviews (mechanical plaque removal) and two traditional systematic reviews (chemical plaque control/anti-inflammatory agents) formed the basis of this consensus. Results Data support the belief that professionally administered plaque control significantly improves gingival inflammation and lowers plaque scores, with some evidence that reinforcement of oral hygiene provides further benefit. Re-chargeable power toothbrushes provide small but statistically significant additional reductions in gingival inflammation and plaque levels. Flossing cannot be recommended other than for sites of gingival and periodontal health, where inter-dental brushes (IDBs) will not pass through the interproximal area without trauma. Otherwise, IDBs are the device of choice for interproximal plaque removal. Use of local or systemic anti-inflammatory agents in the management of gingivitis has no robust evidence base. We support the almost universal recommendations that all people should brush their teeth twice a day for at least 2 min. with fluoridated dentifrice. Expert opinion is that for periodontitis patients 2 min. is likely to be insufficient, especially when considering the need for additional use of inter-dental cleaning devices. In patients with gingivitis once daily inter-dental cleaning is recommended and the adjunctive use of chemical plaque control agents offers advantages in this group. © 2015 John Wiley &amp; Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd

Effect of two antimicrobial agents on early in situ biofilm formation.

Item does not contain fulltextOBJECTIVES: The aim of this observer-blind, controlled, three-cell cross-over study was to evaluate the influence of an amine fluoride/stannous fluoride (Meridol, 250 ppm; ASF) and a chlorhexidine mouthrinse (CHX; Chlorhexamed forte, 0.2%) compared with water on in situ biofilm growth. MATERIAL AND METHODS: After a professional toothcleaning seven volunteers had to wear a special acrylic appliance, in which six specimens each were inserted to allow the build-up of intra-oral biofilms. The volunteers had to rinse twice daily for 1 min. with 10 ml of the allocated mouthrinse. After 48 h of wearing, the specimens with the adhering biofilms were removed from the splints and stained with two fluorescent dyes, which selectively stain vital bacteria green and dead bacteria red. Under the confocal laser scanning microscope biofilm thickness (BT) was evaluated. To examine bacterial vitality (BV%) the biofilms were scanned (1 microm sections) and digital images were made. An image analysis program was used to calculate the mean BV as well as the BV of the single sections. After a wash-out period of 14 days a new test cycle was started. Results : The use of CHX and ASF resulted in a BT of 8.4+/-4.4 mum and 15.7+/-9.9 compared with 76.7+/-29.4 mum using water. The mean vitality (in %) was reduced from 66.1+/-20.4 to 23.3+/-11.6 and 23.9+/-12.4 using CHX and ASF, respectively. Both active solutions reduced BT and BV significantly compared with water (p0.05). CONCLUSION: Both mouthrinses showed antibacterial and plaque-reducing properties against the in situ biofilm. The study design enables the examination of an undisturbed oral biofilm and for the first time shows the influence of antibacterial components applied under clinical conditions regarding biofilm formation