The purpose of the present study was to assess in a clinical trial over 5 years the results following 4 different modalities of periodontal therapy (pocket elimination or reduction surgery, modified Widman flap surgery, subgingival curettage, and scaling and rool planing). 90 patients were treated. The treatment methods were applied on a random basis to each of the 4 quadrants of the dentition. The patients were given professional tooth cleaning and oral hygiene instructions every 3 months. Pocket depth and attachment levels were scored once a year. 72 patients completed the 5 years of observation. Both patient means for pocket depth and attachment level as well as % distribution of sites with loss of attachment greater than or equal to 2 mm and greater than or equal to 3 mm were compared. For 1-3 mm probing depth, scaling and root planing, as well as subgingival curettage led to significantly less attachment loss than pocket elimination and modified Widman flap surgery. For 4-6 mm pockets, scaling and root planing and curettage had better attachment results than pocket elimination surgery. For the 7-12 mm pockets, there was no statistically significant difference among the results following the various procedures.

Results of various modalities of periodontal therapy were studied in 90 subjects (mean age 45 years) with moderate to severe periodontitis. Initial measurements of pocket depth and clinical attachment levels were compared with measurements obtained after the initial hygienic phase of the treatment and measurements of the same areas 1 and 2 years after four different types of periodontal treatment had been applied on a randomized basis to each of the four quadrants of the dentition. These treatments were: (1) surgical pocket elimination or reduction, (2) modified Widman flap surgery. (3) subgingival curettage, (4) scaling and root planing only. The patients were recalled for prophylaxis every 3 months, and rescored annually. One-way analysis of variance and Scheffe's method were used to test the hypothesis of equal treatment effects. The results were analyzed both with initial pocket depth as the baseline and with pocket depth at the hygienic phase as the baseline using a grouping of pockets 1 to 3 mm, 4 to 6 mm, and greater than or equal to 7 mm. For the 1 to 3 mm pockets there was a slight reduction in depth at the hygienic phase, with only minor changes after the various modalities of treatment over 2 years. However, significant losses of attachment after all modalities of periodontal therapy, including scaling alone, were observed at both the 1-year an 2-year intervals. For pockets 4 to 6 mm deep, the main reduction in pocket depth occurred at the hygienic phase, but the pockets also were reduced by further treatment, most by pocket elimination and modified Widman surgery. However, this reduction in pocket depth after surgery had no beneficial influence on maintenance of the attachment level, which actually was maintained best by scaling alone. For deep pockets greater than or equal to 7 mm, significant reduction in pocket depth occurred both at the hygienic phase and 1 to 2 years after treatment, with the greatest initial reduction after pocket elimination surgery. However, again there was no significant difference in attachment results among the four methods.

The purpose of this study was to compare, longitudinally, the effectiveness of scaling and root planing, osseous surgery, and the modified Widman procedures. The study was carried out in a private practice setting. Sixteen adult patients with moderate to advanced adult periodontitis were treated with initial scaling and oral hygiene procedures. Posthygiene data were used for comparison of changes in probing depth, clinical attachment levels and gingival recession. The initial examination data were used to compare changes in plaque and gingival indices. Frequency distributions were used to compare changes that occurred at individual sites. At one year, plaque and gingival indices were significantly reduced when compared with the initial examination. At one year, shallow pockets (1-3 mm) were reduced when compared to posthygiene. Four- to six-millimeter pockets were significantly reduced by the three procedures. Osseous surgery and modified Widman had significantly greater pocket reduction when compared with scaling. For pockets greater than 7 mm, osseous surgery and the modified Widman had significantly greater reduction when compared with scaling. For pockets 1-3 mm at one year osseous surgery had significantly greater clinical attachment loss when compared with scaling. For 4-6 mm pockets at one year, the three procedures had slight gains in clinical attachment levels. The results were similar for pockets with greater than 7 mm. Interproximal soft tissue craters were measured for six postoperative weeks. Initially, the modified Widman had a higher percentage of soft tissue craters when compared with osseous surgery. At six weeks, however, there were no significant differences when the surgical procedures were compared. Recession was measured at each examination. Recession for 1-3 mm pockets at one year was greater for osseous surgery when compared with scaling and the modified Widman. Recession for 4-6 mm and greater than 7 pockets was greater for the surgical procedures than scaling. The results from this study indicate that with three-month maintenance recalls, both the modified Widman and osseous surgery are effective for pocket reduction, and each will produce a slight gain of clinical attachment over one year. Scaling was effective at maintaining attachment levels but was not as effective in reducing pocket depth.

No abstract

This 5-year clinical trial demonstrates that with good patient maintenance excellent clinical results can be achieved with various methods of treatment. Within the limits of this study, SRP, OS, and MW were effective at reducing probing depths with slight changes in clinical attachment levels.