Munteanu Ioana R, Luca Ruxandra E, Mateas Marius, Darawsha Laura Diana, Boia Simina, Boia Eugen-Radu, Todea Carmen D
Department of Oral Rehabilitation and Dental Emergencies, Faculty of Dentistry, "Victor Babes" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Eftimie Murgu Square No. 2, 300041 Timisoara, Romania.
The Interdisciplinary Center for Dental Medical Research, Lasers and Innovative Technologies, Piaţa Eftimie Murgu Nr. 2, 300041 Timişoara, Romania.
Diagnostics (Basel). 2022 Dec 2;12(12):3026. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics12123026.
Research in the field of periodontal disease continues to focus on disease-associated microorganisms, as the microbial plaque and the host immune responses are considered to be important causative factors, that are highly responsible for the progression of this disease. The purpose of this article is to compare the reduction in the number of specific periodontopathogens in two test groups according to different therapeutic approaches in periodontal disease and to show possible differences. This article is based on a prospective clinical study involving eighteen subjects with forty-four average periodontal pockets assigned to study groups treated by two different methods, SRP and SRP followed by a single PDT application. Efficiency in removing specific bacterial species was evaluated by PCR testing, at baseline and immediately after treatment. The hypothesis that using SRP + aPDT results in an increased decontamination potential was confirmed statistically, when all five specific bacterial pathogens were investigated together. When the pathogens were considered separately, two of the five microorganisms tested were significantly lower in the SRP + PDT group (p < 0.00), and important germ counts reductions were also observed for the other three. There is also a statistically significant relation between the pain at 48 h postoperatively and the type of treatment the patients received, as resulted from the Questionnaire Form. Our results demonstrate that aPDT, as an adjunctive treatment to conservative mechanical cleaning of root surfaces at sites affected by periodontitis, represents an effective tool in terms of reducing specific periodontopathogen germs.
牙周疾病领域的研究继续聚焦于与疾病相关的微生物,因为微生物菌斑和宿主免疫反应被认为是重要的致病因素,对该疾病的进展负有高度责任。本文的目的是根据牙周疾病的不同治疗方法,比较两个试验组中特定牙周病原体数量的减少情况,并展示可能存在的差异。本文基于一项前瞻性临床研究,该研究纳入了18名受试者,他们共有44个平均牙周袋,被分配到采用两种不同方法治疗的研究组,即单纯龈下刮治术(SRP)组和先进行SRP然后单次应用光动力疗法(PDT)组。在基线和治疗后立即通过聚合酶链反应(PCR)检测评估去除特定细菌种类的效率。当对所有五种特定细菌病原体一起进行研究时,使用SRP + 光动力疗法(aPDT)可提高去污潜力这一假设得到了统计学证实。当分别考虑这些病原体时,在SRP + PDT组中,所检测的五种微生物中有两种显著减少(p < 0.00),另外三种也观察到重要的菌数减少。根据问卷调查表的结果,术后48小时的疼痛与患者接受的治疗类型之间也存在统计学上的显著关系。我们的结果表明,作为对受牙周炎影响部位进行保守性根面机械清洁的辅助治疗方法,光动力疗法在减少特定牙周病原体方面是一种有效的工具。