Plaque Biofilm

Devi, Prapulla; Biradar, Baswaraj

doi:10.5772/23686

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In these patients, there is also a vicious circle effect: The gingival overgrowth promotes dental plaque retention on increased gingival surfaces, and concurrently, the development of false periodontal pockets provide favorable conditions for the formation of the higher pathogenic anaerobic flora ( 6 ). Of course, the poorly marginally adapted prosthodontics play also an important role in excessive plaque retention and act as irritating spikes for the already inflamed gingiva.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gingival overgrowth approached using recent mechanical and laser technologies: A case report

Mihai,

Parlatescu,

Calin

et al. 2024

Exp Ther Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gingival enlargement is a side effect of different drug classes, with calcium channel blockers being among the most often cited examples. Most often accompanied by a disruption in the oral biofilm, this form of gingival overgrowth, with histological signs of hyperplasia and hypertrophy, becomes a chronic inflammatory condition with the oral biofilm a primary cause. This periodontal disease is now classified as ‘dental biofilm-induced gingivitis’, and its preferred name is drug-influenced gingival expansion. The present study presented the case of a patient with gingival enlargement while being treated with nifedipine for cardiac disease. This patient had factors that contributed to the retention of bacteria, ranging from poor oral hygiene practices to poorly adapted prosthodontics. After reducing these factors, a multimodal treatment was conducted, including bacterial mechanical decontamination through guided biofilm therapy protocol, laser bacterial decontamination, and surgical laser gingivectomy. The patient was referred to their cardiologist for substituting the calcium channel blocker medication. Clinical evaluations followed each treatment step. At 12 months, the patient presented positive, stable results, with an improvement in gingival status (no gingival overgrowth in the area where all risk factors were eliminated and minimal overgrowth in the area where old poorly marginally adapted prosthodontics were kept in place and no/minimal signs of gingival inflammation).

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%