Amount of Cementum After Scaling, Root Planing and Glycine Air Polishing
NCT ID: NCT02205619
Last Updated: 2014-07-31
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
PHASE2/PHASE3
48 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2013-09-30
2014-07-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Previously it was accepted that bacterial endotoxins or bacteria penetrate the cementum of periodontally diseased root surfaces. Therefore, besides the removal of the subgingival plaque and calculus deposits, the removal of all or most of the cementum was one of the primary endpoints of periodontal healing. The goal of periodontal therapy was to attain a planed root surface with a smooth and hard surface characteristics and free of endotoxins as the cementum of a tooth prior to eruption. While some studies have reported that endotoxins are not located within cementum it has been accepted that the removal of 'diseased' cementum was not necessary for a successful periodontal treatment.
Saygin et al. reported that cementum is the site where soft-tissue attachment has to be re-established, and cementum matrix is a rich source of many growth factors which influence the activities of various periodontal cell types and Grzesik et al. stated that cementum plays a regulatory role in periodontal regeneration. From these studies it can be concluded that non-aggressive periodontal treatment is necessary for optimal periodontal health as well as for periodontal regeneration.
During periodontal therapy subgingival instrumentation by means of the removal of root cementum can be eventually lead to exposure of dentinal tubules, pulp injury and dentin hypersensitivity. The in vitro studies including establishing in vitro experimental models under standardized experimental conditions evaluated the amount of cementum with various instruments or force combinations. Several studies, which showed the effects of different instruments on root surfaces, emphasized that periodontal treatment can be performed less aggressively with respect to the removal of cementum.
Previously reported that the teeth treated by HC and US can present a surface without cementum and the open dentinal tubules.They reported that root surfaces treated by US showed a scaly and rough topography whether the teeth treated with HC presented smooth surfaces. Kawashima and co-workers compared two different piezoelectric US (VectorTM and EnacR scaler) and HC and found that both US groups had significantly more remaining cementum than the HC group. However they observed some areas with thin or absent cementum in the HC group. Ruhling et al. compared the effects of the piezoelectric US, sonic scaler (SS), sonic scaler insert coated with Teflon tube, Periotor insert and HC. They showed that HC and SS group presented greater removal of root cementum and nearly all cementum was removed in 25% of the samples treated with HC.
Tomasi et al. reported that biofilm and calculus certainly should be removed but also they questioned the requirement for removal of contaminated root cementum by root planing. US with new shaped tips and AP devices as alternative to HC designed for subgingival access have been developed for minimal root damage. In recent years, there are newly developed instruments presenting clinically efficient results in the treatment of chronic periodontitis. Subgingival AP has been suggested as a treatment modality for root debridement. Two recent studies have investigated the clinical and microbiological efficacy of subgingival AP by glycine powder in periodontal pockets and they revealed probing depth reductions and removal of subgingival biofilm. Today there is no scientific research evidence showing the loss of root substance or surface roughness by subgingival AP or US instrumentation with AP.
The aim of the present study was to compare the effect of in vivo root instrumentation using a new piezoelectric US instrument, HC and air polishing by glycine powder, under routine clinical conditions, on the thickness and surface characteristics of cementum.
Forty-eight periodontally involved caries free, single rooted teeth with advanced periodontitis scheduled for extraction treated in four different methods. The teeth were instrumented subgingivally at one approximal site either by hand curettes (HC), piezoelectric ultrasonic scaler (US), piezoelectric ultrasonic scaler following air polishing, air polishing (AP) alone. Upon extracting the teeth, instrumented and other non-instrumented sites analyzed with a dissecting microscope and SEM for the measurement of amount and surface characteristics of residual cementum.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Keywords
Explore important study keywords that can help with search, categorization, and topic discovery.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
FACTORIAL
TREATMENT
TRIPLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Ultrasonic instrumentation
Prior to extraction, the teeth (N = 12) were randomly included into ultrasonic instrumentation (Air Flow Master Piezon®, EMS SA, Nyon - Swiss) treatment group
Air Flow Master Piezon®, EMS SA, Nyon, Swiss
comparison of different instruments on root cementum: Instrumentations with US devices ( Air Flow Master Piezon®, EMS SA, Nyon, Swiss) were performed with medium power settings and with the use of water cooling (as instructed by the manufacturer). One approximal root surface (distal and mesial) of each tooth was randomly subjected to debridement and the other approximal surface was used as control. All the instrumentations of teeth were performed by a single operator. The criteria for adequate treatment were smooth, hard root surfaces, with no remnants of calculus. The cleanliness and smoothness of the root surface were checked using a fine dental explorer. The instrumentations were done under local anesthesia.
Hand instrumentation
Prior to extraction, the teeth (N = 12) were randomly included into hand curette (Gracey curettes, American Eagle, Missoula, MT, USA) treatment group hand instrumentation (Gracey curettes 5/6, 11/12, 13/14 American Eagle, Missoula, MT, USA)
Gracey curettes, American Eagle, Missoula, MT, USA
comparison of different instruments on root cementum Hand instruments (Gracey curettes 5/6, 11/12, 13/14 American Eagle, Missoula, MT, USA) were used for subgingival root instrumentation. The criteria for adequate treatment were smooth, hard root surfaces, with no remnants of calculus. The cleanliness and smoothness of the root surface were checked using a fine dental explorer. The instrumentations were done under local anesthesia.
subgingival airpolishing with glycine
Prior to extraction, the teeth (N = 12) were randomly included into air-polishing (Air Flow Master Piezon®, EMS SA, Nyon - Swiss) with the glycine powder (Air-flow® Powder Perio, EMS) treatment group.
subgingival airpolishing with glycine(Air-flow® Powder Perio, EMS SA, Nyon, Swiss)
Air-flow® Powder Perio, EMS SA, Nyon, Swiss
comparison of different instruments on root cementum: Instrumentations with air polishing (Air-flow® Powder Perio, EMS SA, Nyon, Swiss) were performed with a special nozzle and medium power settings and with the use of water cooling (as instructed by the manufacturer). One approximal root surface (distal and mesial) of each tooth was randomly subjected to debridement and the other approximal surface was used as control. All the measurements and instrumentations of teeth were performed by a single operator. The criteria for adequate treatment were smooth, hard root surfaces, with no remnants of calculus. The cleanliness and smoothness of the root surface were checked using a fine dental explorer. The instrumentations were done under local anesthesia
ultrasonic following airpolishing
Prior to extraction, the teeth (N = 12) were randomly included into ultrasonic following airpolishing ( Air Flow Master Piezon®, EMS SA, Nyon, Swiss) (Air-flow® Powder Perio, EMS SA, Nyon, Swiss) with the glycine powder treatment group
Air Flow Master Piezon®, EMS SA, Nyon, Swiss
comparison of different instruments on root cementum: Instrumentations with US devices ( Air Flow Master Piezon®, EMS SA, Nyon, Swiss) were performed with medium power settings and with the use of water cooling (as instructed by the manufacturer). One approximal root surface (distal and mesial) of each tooth was randomly subjected to debridement and the other approximal surface was used as control. All the instrumentations of teeth were performed by a single operator. The criteria for adequate treatment were smooth, hard root surfaces, with no remnants of calculus. The cleanliness and smoothness of the root surface were checked using a fine dental explorer. The instrumentations were done under local anesthesia.
Air-flow® Powder Perio, EMS SA, Nyon, Swiss
comparison of different instruments on root cementum: Instrumentations with air polishing (Air-flow® Powder Perio, EMS SA, Nyon, Swiss) were performed with a special nozzle and medium power settings and with the use of water cooling (as instructed by the manufacturer). One approximal root surface (distal and mesial) of each tooth was randomly subjected to debridement and the other approximal surface was used as control. All the measurements and instrumentations of teeth were performed by a single operator. The criteria for adequate treatment were smooth, hard root surfaces, with no remnants of calculus. The cleanliness and smoothness of the root surface were checked using a fine dental explorer. The instrumentations were done under local anesthesia
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Air Flow Master Piezon®, EMS SA, Nyon, Swiss
comparison of different instruments on root cementum: Instrumentations with US devices ( Air Flow Master Piezon®, EMS SA, Nyon, Swiss) were performed with medium power settings and with the use of water cooling (as instructed by the manufacturer). One approximal root surface (distal and mesial) of each tooth was randomly subjected to debridement and the other approximal surface was used as control. All the instrumentations of teeth were performed by a single operator. The criteria for adequate treatment were smooth, hard root surfaces, with no remnants of calculus. The cleanliness and smoothness of the root surface were checked using a fine dental explorer. The instrumentations were done under local anesthesia.
Gracey curettes, American Eagle, Missoula, MT, USA
comparison of different instruments on root cementum Hand instruments (Gracey curettes 5/6, 11/12, 13/14 American Eagle, Missoula, MT, USA) were used for subgingival root instrumentation. The criteria for adequate treatment were smooth, hard root surfaces, with no remnants of calculus. The cleanliness and smoothness of the root surface were checked using a fine dental explorer. The instrumentations were done under local anesthesia.
Air-flow® Powder Perio, EMS SA, Nyon, Swiss
comparison of different instruments on root cementum: Instrumentations with air polishing (Air-flow® Powder Perio, EMS SA, Nyon, Swiss) were performed with a special nozzle and medium power settings and with the use of water cooling (as instructed by the manufacturer). One approximal root surface (distal and mesial) of each tooth was randomly subjected to debridement and the other approximal surface was used as control. All the measurements and instrumentations of teeth were performed by a single operator. The criteria for adequate treatment were smooth, hard root surfaces, with no remnants of calculus. The cleanliness and smoothness of the root surface were checked using a fine dental explorer. The instrumentations were done under local anesthesia
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* behavioral factors (no smoking habits);
* dental and periodontal factors not to have had previous periodontal therapy; no class III dental mobility;
* a periodontal probing depth (PPD) ≥ 4 mm in at least two sites per tooth with single rooted ;
* have no caries or restorations on the mesial and distal surfaces and bleeding on probing.
Exclusion Criteria
* smoking habits
* have caries or restorations on the mesial and distal surfaces and bleeding on probing.
* have had previous periodontal therapy; class III dental mobility;
18 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University of Roma La Sapienza
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Dr.Esra Bozbay
PhD Student
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Esra Bozbay, Dr
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
*Department of Dentistry and Maxillofacial Surgery, Section of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Francesco Dominici, Dr
Role: STUDY_CHAIR
*Department of Dentistry and Maxillofacial Surgery, Section of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Serdar Cintan, Prof
Role: STUDY_CHAIR
†Department of Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Aslan Yasar Gokbuget, Prof
Role: STUDY_CHAIR
†Department of Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Luigi Guida, Prof
Role: STUDY_CHAIR
‡Department of Odontostomatological, Orthodontic and Surgical Disciplines, Second University of Naples, Naples, Italy.
Mehmet Serif Aydin, MSc Bio
Role: STUDY_CHAIR
§Department of Histology and Embryology, Faculty of Medicine, Bezmialem Vakif University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Andrea Pilloni, Prof
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
*Department of Dentistry and Maxillofacial Surgery, Section of Periodontics, School of Dentistry, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
ABT-1233-RV
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id