Bollen C M, Quirynen M
Department of Periodontology, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium.
J Periodontol. 1996 Nov;67(11):1143-58. doi: 10.1902/jop.1996.67.11.1143.
The recognition of the microbial origin and the specificity of periodontal infections has resulted in the development of several adjunctive therapies (antibiotics and/or antiseptics) to scaling and root planing in the treatment of chronic adult periodontitis. This article aims to review the "additional" effect of a subgingival irrigation with chlorhexidine, or a local or systemic application of tetracycline or metronidazole, performed in combination with a single course of scaling and root planing in patients with chronic adult periodontitis. All treatment modalities are compared with scaling and root planing, based on their impact on: the probing depth (PD); total number of colony forming units per ml (CFU/ml); the proportions and/or the detection-frequency of Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans, Porphyromonas gingivalis, and Prevotella intermedia; and/or on the percentages of cocci, spirochetes, motile, and other micro-organisms on dark field microscopy examination. All treatment modalities, including scaling and root planing without additional chemical therapy, resulted in significant reductions in the probing depth and the proportions of periodontopathogens, at least during the first 8 weeks post-therapy. However in comparison to a single course of scaling and root planing, the supplementary effect of adjunctive therapies seems to be limited. In general, only the irrigation with chlorhexidine 2%, the local application of minocycline, and the systemic use of metronidazole (in case of large proportions of spirochetes) or doxycycline (in case of large proportions of A. actinomycetemcomitans) seem to result in a prolonged supplementary effect when compared to scaling and root planing. Therefore, the use of antibiotics on a routine basis, especially in a systemic way, in the treatment of chronic adult periodontitis, can no longer be advocated, considering the increasing danger for the development of microbial resistance.
对牙周感染的微生物起源及其特异性的认识,促使人们在慢性成人牙周炎的治疗中,开发了几种辅助治疗方法(抗生素和/或防腐剂),以辅助龈下刮治和根面平整。本文旨在回顾在慢性成人牙周炎患者中,使用洗必泰进行龈下冲洗、局部或全身应用四环素或甲硝唑,并结合单次龈下刮治和根面平整所产生的“额外”效果。所有治疗方式都与龈下刮治和根面平整进行了比较,比较的依据是它们对以下方面的影响:探诊深度(PD);每毫升菌落形成单位总数(CFU/ml);伴放线放线杆菌、牙龈卟啉单胞菌和中间普氏菌的比例和/或检测频率;和/或暗视野显微镜检查中球菌、螺旋体、活动菌和其他微生物的百分比。所有治疗方式,包括不进行额外化学治疗的龈下刮治和根面平整,至少在治疗后的前8周内,都能使探诊深度和牙周病原体比例显著降低。然而,与单次龈下刮治和根面平整相比,辅助治疗的补充效果似乎有限。一般来说,只有2%洗必泰冲洗、米诺环素局部应用以及甲硝唑全身应用(在螺旋体比例较大的情况下)或强力霉素全身应用(在伴放线放线杆菌比例较大的情况下),与龈下刮治和根面平整相比,似乎能产生延长的补充效果。因此,考虑到微生物耐药性发展的风险增加,不再提倡在慢性成人牙周炎的治疗中常规使用抗生素,尤其是全身使用抗生素。