Journal
PHOTODIAGNOSIS AND PHOTODYNAMIC THERAPY
Volume 44, Issue -, Pages -Publisher
ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.pdpdt.2023.103749
Keywords
Periodontitis; Non-surgical therapy; Photodynamic; Ozone; Periodontal pathogens
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Both ozone therapy and photodynamic therapy can significantly improve clinical and microbiological parameters in chronic periodontitis, but there is no significant difference in effectiveness between the two treatment methods.
Background: Periodontitis is a chronic multifactorial inflammatory disease associated with dysbiotic plaque biofilms and characterized by progressive destruction of the tooth-supporting apparatus. Treatment of the periodontitis is a key challenge since the disease occurs due to microbial biofilm which is extremely resistant to host response and antimicrobials. Among non-surgical methods, scaling and root planning (SRP) is considered as the fundamental method and results in the utmost improvements. However, complete elimination of subgingival calculus is difficult. A substitute treatment in inhibition of subgingival microbiota can be attained by ozonated water at a concentration of 0.5-4 mg/L. Lately, laser light therapy has been proposed in periodontal therapy in an endeavor to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of bacterial elimination and root surface debridement.Materials and methods: 26 patients with chronic periodontitis were selected. The selected arches were randomly divided into two groups: Group-A was subjected to SRP + Ozone-Therapy and Group-B to SRP + Photodynamic-Therapy. Clinical parameters were recorded at baseline, 1&2months. Microbial parameters were recorded at baseline and 2-months.Results: For both the groups significant decrease in clinical parameters were seen from baseline to 1 month and further in 2 months. On intergroup comparison of clinical parameters no significant result was found. Both the groups showed significant decrease in microbial parameters was seen from baseline to 2 months. On intergroup comparison of microbial parameters no significant result was found.Conclusion: Clinically and microbiologically, there was significant difference in both the groups between all time periods (P < 0.001), however there was no significant difference between the two groups at all periods (P > 0.05).
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available