Search

Objective: The aim of this research was to evaluate peri-implant health status in patients infected with COVID-19 and control patients (individuals without COVID-19)., Methods: This observational investigation was performed in adults with (test group) and without (control group) COVID-19 infection having at least 1 functional dental implant. Self-reported education status and daily frequency of toothbrushing and flossing was determined. A questionnaire was administered to record demographic data, brushing/flossing frequency, and education status. Periodontal examination comprised full-mouth assessment of clinical attachment loss (CAL), plaque index (PI), probing depth (PD), and gingival index (GI). Peri-implant PD, modified PI, and modified gingival index were recorded. Loss of marginal and crestal bone around teeth and implants was also measured. Significance level was established for P < .05., Results: Seventy-three (41 males) and 71 (44 males) individuals were included in the test and control groups, respectively. Average ages of patients and controls were 44.6 ± 5.2 and 40.1 ± 3.1 years, respectively. University-level education was attained by 52 (75.3%) and 50 (70.4%) individuals in the test and control groups, respectively. Seventy (95.9%) and 68 (95.7%) patients and controls were brushing twice a day. Once-daily interproximal flossing was reported by 44 (60.3%) and 48 (67.6%) individuals in test and control groups. All participants had healthy periodontal and peri-implant tissues., Conclusions: The study indicated that there are no short-term adverse effects on the peri-implant tissues due to acute COVID-19 infection, and further well-controlled longitudinal studies are needed to evaluate the long-term effect of the infection on these tissues., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest None disclosed., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The aim of the present short-term randomized clinical trial was to assess the efficacy of scaling and root planing (SRP) with and without adjunct antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) in the treatment of chronic periodontitis (CP) among cigarette-smokers and never-smokers., Materials and Methods: Demographic information was collected using a questionnaire. Cigarette-smokers (group-1) and never-smokers (group-2) with CP were included. Treatment wise, these individuals were divided into two subgroups as follows: (a) SRP alone and (b) SRP with adjunct aPDT. Periodontal parameters (plaque index [PI], bleeding on probing [BOP], clinical attachment loss [AL] and probing pocket depth≥4 mm [PD] were measured at baseline and at 1 month and 3 months' follow-up. Group comparisons were done using the Kruskall-Wallis test., Results: Eighty-three male patients with CP (Group-1: 42 cigarette-smokers and; Group-2: 41 never-smokers) were included. In group-1, individuals that received SRP alone and SRP with adjunct aPDT had a mean history of cigarette smoking of 11.7 ± 0.3 and 12.5 ± 0.4 pack years. At baseline, PI, BOP, PD and clinical AL were comparable among all individuals in groups 1 and 2. At 1 month and 3 months' follow-up, PI (P < 0.05), PD (P < 0.05) and clinical AL (P < 0.05) were higher among all individuals in group-1 compared with group-2. In Group-2, PI, BOP, PD and clinical AL were comparable among all individuals at 1 month and 3 months' follow-up., Conclusion: Outcomes of SRP with or without aPDT for the treatment of CP are compromised in cigarette-smokers. Among never-smokers with CP, outcomes of SRP with or without aPDT are comparable. The significance of aPDT in this regard remains questionable., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)