PurposePeri-implant sulcular fluid (PISF) has a production mechanism similar to gingival crevicular fluid (GCF). However, limited research has been performed comparing their behavior in response to inflammation. Hence, the aim of the present study was to comparatively evaluate PISF and GCF volume with varying degrees of clinical inflammatory parameters.MethodsScreening of patients was conducted. Based on the perimucosal inflammatory status, 39 loaded implant sites were selected from 24 patients, with equal numbers of sites in healthy, peri-implant mucositis, and peri-implantitis subgroups. GCF collection was done from age- and sex-matched dentate patients, selected with gingival inflammatory status corresponding to the implant sites. Assessment of the inflammatory status for dental/implant sites was performed using probing depth (PD), plaque index/modified plaque index (PI/mPI), gingival index/simplified gingival index (GI/sGI), and modified sulcular bleeding index (BI). Sample collection was done using standardized absorbent paper strips with volumetric evaluation performed via an electronic volume quantification device.ResultsPositive correlation of the PISF and GCF volume was seen with increasing PD and clinical inflammatory parameters. A higher correlation of GCF with PD (0.843) was found when compared to PISF (0.771). PISF expressed a higher covariation with increasing grades of sGI (0.885), BI (0.841), and mPI (0.734), while GCF established a moderately positive correlation with GI (0.694), BI (0.696), and PI (0.729).ConclusionsWithin the limitations of this study, except for minor fluctuations, GCF and PISF volumes demonstrated a similar nature and volumetric pattern through increasing grades of inflammation, with PISF showing better correlation with the clinical parameters.

The rise and descent of plasma Hcy levels with periodontal inflammation and therapy, respectively, indicate a direct relationship of Hcy with chronic periodontitis. NSPT may be employed as an adjunctive Hcy Lowering Therapy, contributing towards primary prevention against CVD's.

A 45-year-old male patient reported to the Department of Periodontology, Krishnadevaraya College of Dental Sciences and Hospital, Bangalore for management of dull and nagging pain since 4 days in 45 and 46. Intraoral examination revealed generalized periodontal pockets (4-7 mm), Grade II furcation involvement in 46 and localized periodontal abscess in respect to 44 and 45. Radiographically, 44 and 45 demonstrated moderate angular bone loss with a deeper component distally. The case was diagnosed as moderate chronic periodontitis with chronic localized periodontal abscess at 44 and 45. A comprehensive treatment plan including non-surgical and presumptive surgical therapy including use of LLLT and bone graft was presented before the patient and signed informed consent was obtained.On day 1, intra-sulcular emergency abscess drainage was carried out at 44 and 45. Non-surgical periodontal therapy consisting of full mouth scaling and root planing was completed within next three weeks, with follow-up up of three months. The clinical parameters were recorded [Table/ Fig-1,2]. Observing optimal plaque control, good patient compliance and deep residual pockets, decision for surgical treatment was made and informed to the patient.

The design of orbital prosthesis to rehabilitate patients with orbital exenteration depends on the underlying clinical condition, material chosen for prosthesis, method of retention of the prosthesis, and and preference of the patient. Rehabilitation of a patient with orbital exenteration due to mucormycosis has been described by fabricating a prosthesis that used polymethyl methacrylate (to fabricate a conformer) and silicone material (to fabricate prosthetic superstructure). The two-component prosthesis was designed to attain dual mechanical retention using an anatomic undercut (conformer) and manually created mechanical undercut (prosthetic superstructure). The objective was to maintain the biological health of the underlying postsurgical tissue, longevity of the prosthesis, optimal esthetics, and adequate retention.