Bansal Monika, Singh Tej Bali
Department of Periodontics, Faculty of Dental Sciences, Institute of Medical Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Department of Community Medicine, Institute of Medical Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India.
J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2016 Jul-Aug;20(4):391-395. doi: 10.4103/0972-124X.189222.
The objectives of the present study were to establish transgingival probing as an evaluating method in the clinical studies of periodontal regenerative techniques and to compare the effectiveness of transgingival probing to the surgical entry.
Ten systemically healthy persons (20-50 years) with moderate to severe chronic periodontitis participated in this study. These cases were recruited into the study only when they fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Vertical probing depth (VPD) and horizontal probing depth (HPD) of furcation defects were measured with and without opening the flap, following local anesthesia during initial surgery and at 6 months after collagen membrane placement. The defect fill (DF) was also noted. The mean measurements of clinical parameters were compared by two-tailed paired -test at 5% level of significance.
The difference between the measurements of VPD and HPD taken during transgingival probing and after opening the flap was lie in the range of 0.10-0.30 mm at the time of initial surgery and 6 months after surgery that was not statistically significant. Persons experienced slight discomfort or pain during opening the flap as compared to transgingival probing, and this method was also appreciated by the patients as it is easy, simple and does not involve the surgical procedure.
The results of the study suggest that measurements recorded during transgingival probing and after opening the flap do not influence the required outcome of regenerative therapies, i.e., DF that was not statistically significant difference from surgical reentry. Therefore, it was concluded that transgingival probing could be used as evaluating parameters to see the outcome of regenerative surgeries and the surgical reentry procedure may be avoided because it is a second surgical procedure, time-consuming and interrupts the healing process.
本研究的目的是确立经龈探诊作为牙周再生技术临床研究中的一种评估方法,并比较经龈探诊与手术切口探诊的有效性。
10名全身健康的20至50岁中重度慢性牙周炎患者参与了本研究。只有符合入选标准的病例才被纳入研究。在初次手术局部麻醉期间及胶原膜植入后6个月,分别在不翻开龈瓣和翻开龈瓣的情况下测量根分叉病变的垂直探诊深度(VPD)和水平探诊深度(HPD)。同时记录缺损填充情况(DF)。采用双侧配对t检验,以5%的显著性水平比较临床参数的平均测量值。
初次手术时及术后6个月,经龈探诊与翻开龈瓣后测量的VPD和HPD差值在0.10至0.30mm范围内,差异无统计学意义。与经龈探诊相比,患者在翻开龈瓣时会感到轻微不适或疼痛,且该方法因其简便、不涉及手术操作而受到患者的认可。
研究结果表明,经龈探诊和翻开龈瓣后记录的测量结果不影响再生治疗所需的结果,即DF,二者差异无统计学意义。因此得出结论,经龈探诊可作为评估再生手术结果的参数,且可避免手术切口探诊,因为它是二次手术,耗时且会干扰愈合过程。