Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is one of the most important imaging modalities for biophotonics applications. In this work, an important step towards the clinical use of OCT in dental practice is reported, by following‐up patients treated from periodontal disease (PD). A total of 147 vestibular dental sites from 14 patients diagnosed with PD were evaluated prior and after treatment, using a swept‐source OCT and two periodontal probes (Florida probe and North Carolina) for comparison. The evaluation was performed at four stages: day 0, day 30, day 60 and day 90. Exceptionally one patient was evaluated 1‐year after treatment. It was possible to visualize in the two‐dimensional images the architectural components that compose the periodontal anatomy, and identify the improvements in biofilm and dental calculus upon treatment. In the follow‐up after the treatment, it was observed in some cases decrease of the gingival thickness associated with extinction of gingival calculus. In some cases, the improvement of both depth of probing with the traditional probes and the evidence in the images of the region was emphasized. The study evidenced the ability of OCT in the identification of periodontal structures and alterations, being an important noninvasive complement or even alternative for periodontal probes for treatment follow‐up. OCT system being used in a clinical environment. Above OCT image (left) prior treatment and (right) 30 days after treatment.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Introduction: Patients with visual impairment present greater difficulty in achieving adequate oral hygiene due to restricted eyesight. Therefore, oral hygiene motivation and instruction methods should be adapted to these patients to understand the importance of bacterial plaque control, both for the health of dental tissues and periodontal tissues. Objective:The objective of the present study was to compare the plaque index (PI) of patients with and without visual impairment before and after the institution of oral hygiene instructions. Twenty patients with visual impairment (Group 1) from the Instituto dos Cegos and 20 without visual impairment (Group 2) from the ASCES Periodontia Clinic were selected. Data were collected through the PI of O'Leary and reevaluated every 21 days for four sessions. Results:In both groups, the mean of PI decreased with the time of evaluation, with a significant difference between the evaluations (p <0.001). Group 1 had a mean PI higher than group 2 only in the fourth evaluation, but there was no significant difference (p> 0.05). As for the mean of the PI assessments, group 2 presented a mean higher than group 1, but without significant difference (p> 0.05). Conclusion:The study therefore suggests that there is no difference in PI in patients with or without visual impairment, and that the guidelines stimulate and motivate an improvement in oral hygiene conditions.