“…This highlights the fact that there was neither clinically nor statistically significant differences in the degree of improvement between the two groups, thereby emphasizing that diabetics and non-diabetics respond in a similar manner to periodontal surgical therapy. This is in agreement with previously reported longitudinal study by Westfelt et al [12] and other treatment and maintenance studies of short duration by Bay et al [25], Sastrowijoto et al [26] and Tervonen et al [27].…”
Aims and objectives The aim of this prospective clinical study was to evaluate the response of type 2 diabetics to periodontal surgical therapy and to compare the treatment outcome with that of non-diabetics.Patients and methods A total of 20 type 2 diabetic and 20 non-diabetic patients with moderate to advanced periodontal disease were recruited in the study. Patients with probing pocket depth ≥ 5 mm in at least three adjacent teeth and with horizontal bone defects (as confirmed by radiographs) were subjected to periodontal surgery. Changes in clinical parameters such as gingival status, probing pocket depth, clinical attachment level, mobility, and position of the gingiva were evaluated 6 months post-operatively.Results Patients in both groups showed significant pocket depth reduction and clinical attachment gain as compared to baseline, however, no differences in the amount of improvement between the groups was seen.Interpretation and conclusions Type 2 diabetic patients respond to periodontal surgical procedures in a manner similar to that of non-diabetics provided good glycemic control and optimum oral hygiene are maintained.
“…This highlights the fact that there was neither clinically nor statistically significant differences in the degree of improvement between the two groups, thereby emphasizing that diabetics and non-diabetics respond in a similar manner to periodontal surgical therapy. This is in agreement with previously reported longitudinal study by Westfelt et al [12] and other treatment and maintenance studies of short duration by Bay et al [25], Sastrowijoto et al [26] and Tervonen et al [27].…”
Aims and objectives The aim of this prospective clinical study was to evaluate the response of type 2 diabetics to periodontal surgical therapy and to compare the treatment outcome with that of non-diabetics.Patients and methods A total of 20 type 2 diabetic and 20 non-diabetic patients with moderate to advanced periodontal disease were recruited in the study. Patients with probing pocket depth ≥ 5 mm in at least three adjacent teeth and with horizontal bone defects (as confirmed by radiographs) were subjected to periodontal surgery. Changes in clinical parameters such as gingival status, probing pocket depth, clinical attachment level, mobility, and position of the gingiva were evaluated 6 months post-operatively.Results Patients in both groups showed significant pocket depth reduction and clinical attachment gain as compared to baseline, however, no differences in the amount of improvement between the groups was seen.Interpretation and conclusions Type 2 diabetic patients respond to periodontal surgical procedures in a manner similar to that of non-diabetics provided good glycemic control and optimum oral hygiene are maintained.
“…While the relationship of periodontal disease to diabetes is fairly wel! established (Glavind et al 1968, Bay et al 1974, the role played by cirrhosis needs further clarification. Sandier & Stahl (1960) found a higher periodontal disease rate (PDR: Sandier & Stah!…”
The periodontal condition of a well-described group of cirrhotic patients was compared with that of a control group, matched for age, sex ratio and socio-economic background, expressed as years of education. The test group comprised 30 cirrhotic patients, 35-64 years of age. The diagnosis cirrhosis of the liver was confirmed histologically, and no other systemic diseases were present. The material was grouped according to age, 35-44, 45-54 and 55-64 years of age. The examination included determination of tooth loss, a plaque index, a gingival index, retentive calculus, retentive decay and fillings, and loss of attachment. The amount of plaque was equal in test and control groups, whereas the cirrhotics had a higher degree of severity of gingival inflammation as well as a greater amount of subgingival calculus than the controls. Test and control groups exhibited no significant difference as regards loss of attachment and tooth loss, and similar correlations between loss of attachment and age were demonstrated in the two groups. Patients suffering from cirrhosis for more than 3 years showed significantly greater loss of attachment, as well as more plaque and calculus compared with those with a disease duration of less than 3 years. It is suggested that this aggravation of the periodontal condition is related to increasing neglect of the teeth, as the cirrhotic condition aggravates.
“…On the other hand, diabetic subjects have a good response to appropriate periodontal treatment. The short‐ and long‐term periodontal response is equal to non‐diabetic patient (Bay et al 1974, Westfelt et al 1996, Christgau et al 1998). However if diabetes is not well controlled, periodontal recurrences will be more frequent and periodontal disease more difficult to control (Seppälä et al 1993, Tervonen & Karjalainen 1997).…”
Although both periodontal treatment regimens are effective in type 1 diabetics, the use of doxycycline as an adjunct, provided more significant results when good plaque control was achieved.
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.