Aim:The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of locally delivered xanthan-based Chlosite® gel as an adjunctive therapy to scaling and root planing in treatment of chronic periodontitis.Materials and Methods:In a randomized controlled clinical study, 30 patients were selected. Pocket depth between 5 and 7 mm was selected and each patient had two sites on the same side of the mouth. A total of 30 control sites were scaled and root planed and 30 test sites were scaled and root planed and Chlosite® gel was added. The clinical parameters, probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), plaque index (PI) and bleeding on probing (BOP), gingival index were recorded at baseline, 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months.Statistical Analysis:Paired/unpaired t-test was used, significance was placed at 5% level of significance, i.e., P < 0.05 was considered as a significant.Results:From baseline to a period of 6 months, significant difference was found between test and control group for PD, CAL, PI and BOP, P value being PD (P = 0.002), CAL index (P = 0.014), respectively.Conclusion:Subgingival injection of xanthan-based Chlosite® gel adjunct with scaling and root planing appeared to cause significant improvement compared with scaling and root planing alone in persons with chronic periodontitis.

Background:Treatment of periodontal diseases by nonsurgical debridement has been considered as a gold standard procedure. Various other treatment modalities have been tried and tested to treat periodontal diseases. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of antioxidant therapy on the progression of periodontal disease as monotherapy and/or as an adjunct to nonsurgical debridement.Materials and Methods:70 subjects were divided into three groups, i.e. clinically healthy, gingivitis and periodontitis group on the basis of Community Periodontal Index of Treatment Needs score. Gingivitis and periodontitis groups were further subdivided into three subgroups. At the baseline, periodontal attachment loss was recorded and scaling and root planing was performed in two subgroups. 6 mg antioxidant was administered in three divided doses for 2 weeks. Saliva samples were collected at baseline, 15th day, 30th day and 45th day for evaluation of uric acid levels.Results:Uric acid levels were significantly low in patients with more periodontal attachment loss as compared to clinically healthy and gingivitis groups. As the treatment was initiated, significant increase in uric acid levels was observed.Conclusion:Rise in salivary antioxidant levels was observed on the administration of antioxidant therapy. Hence, antioxidant therapy can be used as an adjunct to the nonsurgical periodontal therapy.

Background: Plaque is the soft deposit that forms the biofilm consisting of microorganisms adhering to the tooth surface and is proved beyond doubt to be the initiator of gingival and periodontal disease. Plaque control is the mainstay in periodontal disease. Aim: To compare the effect of 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate, raw propolis and 3% hydrogen peroxide mouthwash on dental plaque and gingival inflammation. Materials and Methods: Thirty subjects in the age group of 20-40 years were enrolled in the study. Plaque index and Modified Gingival Index were recorded at baseline and oral prophylaxis was performed. Subjects were then randomly divided into three groups (n=10) and were asked to rinse with 10ml mouthwash twice daily for 15 days. Group I received 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate mouth wash, Group II raw propolis diluted with distilled water (1:1), and Group III 3% hydrogen peroxide (1:1) mouthwash. Subjects were recalled on 7 day and 28 day for re-evaluation and recording plaque index and modified gingival index. Statistical analysis was done to evaluate the efficacy of all the three mouthwashes. Results: The results showed that all the three mouthwashes were effective in reducing plaque and gingival inflammation. Chlorhexidine gluconate 0.2% showed to be the most effective in reduction of dental plaque. Propolis was observed to be the most effective in reducing gingival inflammation over a period of 28 days. Conclusion: Propolis can be effectively used as a mouthwash without any potential side effects as an alternative to chlorhexidine mouthwash in reducing gingival inflammation.

Background:A high number of patients with periodontitis may have undiagnosed diabetes. Self-monitoring devices provide a simple method for rapid monitoring of the glucose level in the blood by utilizing a blood sample from the finger, but this method requires a needle puncture to obtain blood. It is possible that gingival crevicular blood (GCB) from routine periodontal probing may be a source of blood for glucose measurements.Aim:To establish whether GCB can be used as a non-invasive diagnostic aid in screening for diabetes mellitus during routine periodontal examination.Materials and Methods:The study involved 50 diabetics and 50 non-diabetics, with an age range of 26-66 years. Both diabetic and non-diabetic patients had moderate to severe gingivitis with at least one tooth in the maxillary anterior region showing bleeding upon probing. The Gingival Index and Oral Hygiene Index-Simplified were recorded. Blood oozing from the gingival sulcus/pocket following periodontal pocket probing was collected using a capillary tube and transferred to the test stick of a glucose self-monitoring device (Accu-Chek, Roche Diagnostic, Germany) in patients with comparable gingival and oral hygiene status. This value was compared with the peripheral fingerstick blood glucose (PFBG) value, which was obtained by pricking the finger tip at the same visit. Statistical analysis was performed using Pearson's correlation coefficient.Result:There was no statistically significant difference between the gingival crevicular blood glucose (GCBG) values and the PFBG values in both the diabetic (P = 0.129, NS) and the non-diabetic (P = 0.503, NS) groups. Karl Pearson's product–moment correlation coefficient was calculated, which showed a positive correlation between the two measurements in the diabetic (r = 0.943) as well as the non-diabetic (r = 0.926) groups.Conclusion:The results suggest that GCB can be used as a non-invasive diagnostic aid in screening for diabetes mellitus during routine periodontal examination.

One of the commonest treatment options for replacing missing teeth is a root-form implant. Clinically, the key mechanical factor in achieving success is primary stability. This ex vivo study aims to evaluate whether osseodensification method will achieve good primary stability or the conventional drilling protocol. MethodsFresh iliac bone of the sheep was selected similar to D3 and D4 bone densities. A total of 22 osteotomy sites were prepared in the bone sample, of which 11 were prepared by osseodensification method (test group) and other 11 by conventional undersized drilling (control group). Primary stability was measured using insertion torque (IT), resonance frequency analysis (RFA), and reverse torque values (RTVs) by measuring implant stability quotient (ISQ). The recorded data were statistically analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) Version 22.0. The differences between groups were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test and independent t-test. The Pearson correlation coefficient test was performed to measure the linear relationship between two variables. The statistical significance level was established at p<0.05. ResultsWhen the correlation among IT, RTV, and ISQ was measured, a statistically significant correlation between IT and RTV (p=0.001) and between IT and ISQ (p=0.0001) was observed. A statistically significant (p=0.014) correlation between RTV and ISQ was also found. ConclusionOsteotomy prepared by osseodensification method showed higher IT, RTV, and ISQ values than the conventional undersized group.