Background
Air‐polishing appears to be a promising procedure for subgingival biofilm removal in periodontal treatment. The aim of this study was to compare trehalose powder for subgingival air‐polishing with sonic debridement in residual periodontal pockets during maintenance therapy.
Methods
In this blinded, randomized, controlled clinical trial conducted over 6 months with a split‐mouth design, single‐rooted teeth in 44 participants with residual pocket depths of 5 mm and bleeding or >5 mm with and without bleeding were included in this study. Subgingival debridement was carried out using either trehalose powder with an air‐polishing device (test) or a sonic device (control). The reduction in the probing depths after 3 and 6 months was defined as the primary endpoint. A visual analog scale was used to evaluate the discomfort of both procedures.
Results
Both procedures showed statistically significant intragroup reductions in probing depths (test baseline [BL] 5.52 ± 0.93, 6 months 3.66 ± 0.81, control BL 5.55 ± 0.9, 6 months 3.68 ± 0.86, P < 0.001), clinical attachment level (test BL 6.93 ± 1.5, 6 months 5.3 ± 1.52, control BL 7.27 ± 1.8, 6 months 5.84 ± 1.71, P < 0.001), and bleeding on probing (test BL 86%, 6 months 41%, control BL 89%, 6 months 34%, P < 0.001) after 6 months with no significant intergroup differences (P > 0.05, respectively). The visual analog scale showed a significantly lower incidence of discomfort for air‐polishing compared with sonic scaling (test 2.33 ± 2.14, control 4.91 ± 2.65, P < 0.001).
Conclusions
Subgingival air‐polishing with trehalose powder showed comparable clinical outcomes to sonic scaling. Sonic scaling evoked more discomfort compared with air‐polishing.