DM has deleterious effects on bone density and bone loss in the furcation region. These effects are maximized when associated with ligature-induced periodontitis with orthodontic movement.
Objectives The present study aims to evaluate two protocols of pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) on osseointegration and establish one that addresses ideal parameters for its use in dentistry, especially in the optimization of the implants osseointegration process. Materials and methods Sixty male rats (Wistar) were allocated into three experimental groups: control (GC), test A (GTA, 3 h exposed), and test B (GTB, 1 h exposed). All animals received titanium implants in both tibias, and PEMF application (15 Hz, ± 1 mT, 5 days/week) occurred only in the test groups. They were euthanized at 03, 07, 21, and 45 days after PEMF therapy. Removal torque, histomorphometric measurements, three-dimensional radiographic evaluation, and in vitro biological assay analyses were performed. Results GTB showed better results compared with GTA in removal torque tests, in bone volume and bone mineral density, cell viability, total protein content, and mineralization nodules (p < 0.05). GTA showed better performance in trabecular bone thickness and cell proliferation compared with GTB (p < 0.05), especially at osseointegration early periods. In the histomorphometric analysis and number of trabeculae, there were no differences in the test groups. Conclusion PEMF as a biostimulator was effective in optimizing the events in bone tissue that lead to osseointegration, especially when applied for a shorter time and in the initial periods of bone healing. Clinical relevance The PEMF therapy is an effective alternative method for optimizing bone healing.
Within the limitations of the present study, it was concluded that cigarette smoke inhalation had no influence on the evaluated groups, even with the presence of low levels of nicotine, carbon monoxide and tar. The POTM groups did not present greater bone loss compared to P groups, thus periodontal disease is essential for bone loss.
Periodontitis is an inflammatory disease resulting from a complex polymicrobial infection that causes tissue destruction in susceptible individuals. Osteoporosis has been associated with greater clinical attachment loss in patients with periodontitis. Experimental studies have shown positive results in the treatment of osteoporosis through pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) stimulation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of PEMF in the presence of estrogen deficiency associated with periodontitis, verifying its role in bone metabolism and in the inflammatory response. Sixty rats were divided into four groups: Sham surgery + ligature-induced periodontitis (P); Sham surgery + ligatureinduced periodontitis + PEMF therapy (P + PEMF); Ovariectomy surgery + ligature-induced periodontitis (P + OVX); Ovariectomy surgery + ligature-induced periodontitis + PEMF therapy (P + OVX + PEMF). The area of bone loss in the furcation region (BL), connective tissue attachment loss (CTAL) and alveolar bone loss (ABL), BV/TV and BMD were evaluated. In addition to immunohistochemical labelling of RANKL, OPG, and TRAP and the inflammatory response of interleukin (IL)-1b, IL-6, TNF-α, IL-10, and vascular endothelial growth factor. P + OVX showed significant BL in relation to P + PEMF and the greatest CTAL and ABL. P + OVX and P + OVX + PEMF showed a significant reduction in BV/TV (%). P and P + PEMF showed a significantly lesser amount of Tb.Sp (mm) while P + OVX and P + OVX + PEMF showed a lesser of Tb.N. P + PEMF had the greatest BMD. P + OVX presented higher RANKL and lower OPG immunolabeling than other groups. P + PEMF and P + OVX + PEMF showed a reduction on all biomarkers evaluated. The application of PEMF seems to attenuate the effects of bone loss in the presence of periodontitis and ovariectomy. Bioelectromagnetics. 43:426-437, 2022.
Effect of systemic antibiotic and probiotic therapies as adjuvant treatments of subgingival instrumentation for periodontitis: a randomized controlled clinical study* Objective: This study assessed the efficacy of two adjunct therapies (antibiotic and probiotic) for periodontal treatment based on clinical and immunological parameters in patients with Stage II and III Grade B periodontitis. Methodology: 45 patients were randomly allocated into three groups: control group (CG); antibiotic group (GAtb), in which 500 mg amoxicillin + 400 mg metronidazole were used; and probiotic group (GProb), for which Lactobacillus reuteri was used. Patients received medications after undergoing periodontal debridement. Clinical and immunological parameters were assessed at baseline, 30 days, and 90 days. Results: All therapies reduced bleeding on probing (BoP) in the evaluated periods, and the GAtb had a greater reduction at 90 days (p=0.03). The GProb group showed better results for plaque index (PI) and gingival recession (GR) compared to the GAtb at 90 days (p=0.0014; p=0.006). The area of inflammation (PISA Index) significantly decreased in all therapies in the evaluated periods. Therapies had no significant differences regarding moderate pockets. The GAtb had a greater reduction in probing depth (PD) for deep pockets (p=0.03) at 90 days and in the number of deep pocket sites at 30 days (p=0.04). The occurrence of adverse effects was commonly reported in the GAtb as a percentage per patient. The GAtb had a significant reduction in the concentration of interleukins IL-1β and IL-8 and an increase in IL-10 and TNF-α. The CG had a reduction in IL-6 and IL-1 β, whereas in the GProb there was no difference. Conclusion: After three months, none of the adjuvant therapies provided any additional benefit for subgingival instrumentation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.