Search

Introduction: Periodontal disease results in recession and bone loss which causes morphological changes in the root surface. Traditional treatment like scaling and root planing successfully remove plaque and calculus and necrosed cementum but leaves smear layer which may interfere with normal healing. In an effort to overcome this, root conditioning agents were applied on the root surface to remove the smear layer. However, there were certain drawbacks with respect to the conventional root conditioning agents such as the acidic pH which can damage the root surface. Hence, there has been a search for more efficient biocompatible root conditioning agents. The newer insight in the area of root conditioning agents was introduction of Carisolv. However, the evidence with respect to Carisolv as an effective root conditioning agent is scarce. Aim: To evaluate the effectiveness of Carisolv, EDTA-S and EDTA on periodontally diseased root surface and ability to remove smear layer. Materials and Methods: The study constituted of sixty single rooted teeth which were extracted due to periodontal disease. These teeth were randomly allocated into 4 groups (n=15)- Group I: Scaling and Root Planing (SRP) alone, Group II: Carisolv+SRP, Group III: SRP+15% EDTA gel, Group IV: SRP+EDTA-S (EDTA+Texapon/Soft soap mixed in 1:1 ratio) gel. These teeth were treated with the root conditioning agents and evaluated with scanning electronic microscope. The teeth were evaluated for surface morphology, presence of smear layer, Patency of dentinal tubules, Roughness loss of tooth substance index and Sampaio’s Index for root surface modification. These values were statistically analysed using Mann-Whitney U Test. Results: The results demonstrated a highly statistical significance (p

Introduction: Periodontal diagnosis and treatment plan rely on an important aspect which is called as the periodontal probing. However, probing has proven to be a painful procedure especially in untreated chronic periodontitis patients. In an effort to reduce the pain while probing various anaesthetic gels were used and have shown better results. Aim: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the pain elicited during probing pocket depth estimation in a split mouth using anaesthetic gel (Lox 2%) and Placebo. Materials and Methods: The present study was a randomized, placebo-controlled trial, double masked, split mouth study. It was conducted by using a True Pressure Sensitive probe (TPS), wherein probing was done in each quadrant having probing pocket depth >5mm. Randomization was done for application of anaesthetic gel and placebo within the pocket. After 30 seconds of application with the test (Anaesthetic gel Lox 2%, NEON LABORATORIES) and control (placebo) probing was performed. Pain was assessed using visual analogue scale rating from 0 to 10 with ‘0’ as no pain and ‘10’ rating the worst pain. Statistical analysis was done using Mann-Whitney test. Results: The mean VAS score for the test group was 0.621±0.25 and the placebo group was 3.22±1.08. Significant difference in the mean VAS scores was found between the test group and the placebo group. Conclusion: Administration of LOX 2% gel in periodontal pockets prior to probing have shown a significant reduction in pain while probing.