The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of scaling and root planing (S and RP) alone versus tetracycline fiber therapy used adjunctively with S and RP in the treatment of localized recurrent periodontitis sites in maintenance patients. A total of 113 patients receiving regular supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) were treated with whole mouth S and RP. Two non-adjacent sites in separate quadrants were selected in each patient for monitoring based on criteria that the sites were 5 to 8 mm deep and had a history of bleeding on probing. The chosen sites were randomly assigned to one of the two treatment groups. Probing depth (PD), bleeding on probing (BOP), and clinical attachment level (CAL) were measured at baseline and 1, 3, and 6 months. At 1, 3 and 6 months, adjunctive fiber therapy was significantly better in reducing PD (P < 0.05) and reducing BOP (P < 0.05) than S and RP alone. At 6 months, fiber therapy was significantly better in promoting clinical attachment gain (P < 0.05) than S and RP alone. Overall, these results indicate that fiber therapy significantly enhanced the effectiveness of S and RP in the management of localized recurrent periodontitis sites, in patients receiving regular supportive periodontal treatment.

The persistence of action, or substantivity, of antimicrobial agents in the mouth appears to be a major variable influencing plaque inhibition. Such substantivity can be assessed by measuring the duration and magnitude of suppression of salivary bacterial numbers produced by antimicrobial agents. Although this has been determined for some agents, there is little information on the substantivity of the numerous products which contain these and other antimicrobial agents. This study was commissioned on the basis that efficacy cannot be assumed merely because a product contains a known active agent. Nine formulations or products were chosen: 2 rinses containing chlorhexidine or C31G, 4 rinses containing cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) (with and without fluoride and/or alcohol), a minus-CPC control rinse, and 2 toothpastes with and without stannous fluoride. Additionally, water was used as a placebo control. Twenty health dentate volunteers took part in this blind, 10 cell randomized, single rinse, cross-over study, which was balanced for carryover. Mouthrinses were 15 ml volumes and toothpastes 3 gm in 10 ml water slurries rinsed for 60 seconds. On the day of each study volunteers suspended oral hygiene habits and at approximately 9:00 a.m. rinsed with the allocated formulation. Unstimulated saliva samples were obtained immediately before and 30, 60, 180, 300, and 420 minutes after rinsing. The samples were immediately processed for total anaerobic bacterial counts. All rinses except water and the minus CPC control rinse produced significant falls in counts to 30 minutes. Of more relevance in this inter-treatment comparison-designed study, the C31G rinse showed significant substantivity compared to water only for 60 minutes. C31G was highly significantly less substantive than chlorhexidine from 30 minutes to 420 minutes. The CPC rinses were similar and significantly more substantive than their control rinse to between 180 and 300 minutes. The stannous fluoride and control pastes were similarly substantive to 300 minutes, with the stannous fluoride paste remaining substantive compared to water to 430 minutes. Based on antimicrobial action these formulations varied considerably in substantivity and this is likely to reflect their comparative plaque inhibitory properties.

SRP alone was ineffective at reducing numbers or proportions of RCB or OCB in current smokers, whereas MM + SRP significantly reduced both. MM + SRP also improved PD, BOP, and CAL to a greater extent than SRP alone independent of smoking status.

The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of supragingival irrigation with 0.06% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) on naturally occurring gingivitis. The relative benefit of CHX irrigation in comparison with CHX rinsing, water irrigation, and normal oral hygiene was evaluated. In a blind, placebo-controlled 6-month study 222 patients were assigned to one of four groups: Group 1: Once daily irrigation with 300 ml water followed by irrigation with 200 ml 0.06% chlorhexidine gluconate (experimental); Group 2: Twice daily rinsing with 15 ml 0.12% chlorhexidine (positive control); Group 3: Once daily irrigation with 500 ml water (irrigation control) and Group 4: Sodium fluoride dentifrice for normal oral hygiene only (negative control). All groups used the same sodium fluoride dentifrice for tooth brushing. At baseline, 3 months, and 6 months patients were examined for Gingival Index (GI), Bleeding on Probing (BOP), Plaque Index (PLI), Pocket probing depth (PD), Calculus Index (CI), and stain. After the baseline visit all patients received a supra- and subgingival oral prophylaxis. At 6 months GI and BOP were significantly (P less than or equal to 0.05) reduced by adjunctive CHX irrigation (42.5% and 35.4%, respectively), CHX rinse (24.1% and 15.0%), and water irrigation (23.1% and 24.0%) compared to tooth brushing alone. Plaque was significantly (P less than or equal to 0.05) reduced only by CHX irrigation (53.2%) and CHX rinse (43.3%) while calculus and staining were significantly (P less than or equal to 0.05) increased in the two chlorhexidine groups (276.4% (irrigation) and 273.2% (rinse)). Although significant (P less than or equal to 0.05), pocket probing depth reduction was minimal after CHX irrigation (4.6%).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of daily water irrigation versus regular oral hygiene alone on gingival and periodontal health in periodontitis patients receiving supportive periodontal treatment. The study also sought to determine if there are enhanced benefits from using an antiplaque zinc sulfate rinse as an irrigant. One hundred fifty‐five patients who have had periodontitis and had been treated either surgically or non‐surgically completed the 6‐month multi‐center multi‐national study. Patients with at least two 5 mm sites demonstrating bleeding on probing were assigned to 3 equal groups by balanced randomization. In all centers Group A (n = 57) performed regular oral hygiene only, and Group B (n = 58) irrigated with 500 ml water once daily after regular oral hygiene. Group C (n = 40) patients irrigated with a total of 500 ml once daily; following irrigation with 300 ml water, the patients then irrigated with an additional 200 ml with a zinc sulfate solution. The irrigants were diluted to provide the manufacturer's recommended daily dosage. The supragingival irrigation was performed with a commercially available oral irrigator. Bacterial measurements at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months were taken to determine the effect of irrigation on the target organisms and will be reported elsewhere. Gingival index: irrigation with water (Group B) was significantly better than normal oral hygiene (Group A) and irrigation with zinc sulfate (Group C) (P < 0.05) in reducing gingival inflammation. Bleeding on probing: significant reductions in bleeding on probing occurred for water (Group B) compared to normal oral hygiene (Group A) (P < 0.01). Among the patients with greater baseline bleeding (> 30% sites), irrigation with water (Group B) was significantly better than normal oral hygiene (Group A) in reducing bleeding on probing and gingival inflammation (P < 0.01); and water irrigation was significantly better than zinc sulfate irrigation (P < 0.05) for reducing gingival inflammation. Probing depth: irrigation with water (Group B) demonstrated clinically small, but statistically significant, reduction (P < 0.05) in probing depth compared to Group A and Group C. Plaque index: there were no significant differences observed. This study demonstrates that adjunctive supragingival irrigation with water can provide meaningful clinical outcomes for patients with periodontitis who are being treated in the maintenance phase of periodontal therapy. J Periodontol 1994; 65:224–229.