Saturday, April 18, 2015

Treating all teeth (full mouth) within 24 hours for chronic gum disease (periodontitis) in adults

Cochrane: Long lasting (chronic) gum disease causes damage to the gums and soft tissue structures around teeth. This review seeks to evaluate the effectiveness of full-mouth treatments carried out within 24 hours compared to the more conventional treatment of partial mouth scaling and root planing (SRP) usually done over a number of weeks. The treatments being reviewed are full-mouth scaling (FMS) and full-mouth disinfection (FMD). A secondary aim was to establish if there was a difference in effectiveness between FMS and FMD. This review updates our previous review published in 2008.


Background

Gum disease or periodontitis is a chronic inflammatory disease that causes damage to the soft tissue and bone around the teeth. Mild periodontitis is common in adults with severe periodontitis occurring in up to 20% of the population. Non-surgical treatments based on the mechanical removal of bacteria from infected root surfaces are used in order to arrest and control the loss of the bone and tissue that support the tooth in adults suffering from chronic gum disease. These treatments can be carried out in a different area of the mouth in separate sessions over a period of several weeks (SRP), which is the conventional method, or alternatively, can be done within 24 hours in one or two sessions, which is termed 'full-mouth scaling' (FMS). When an antiseptic agent (such as chlorhexidine for example) is added to the full-mouth scaling the intervention is called 'full-mouth disinfection' (FMD). The rationale for full-mouth approaches is that they may reduce the likelihood of re-infection in already treated sites.


Study characteristics

This review, carried out within the Cochrane Oral Health Group, is an update of one we published in 2008 and the evidence is current up to March 2015. We identified another five relevant studies for inclusion in this review and therefore this review includes 12 studies, which involved 389 participants. There is one Chinese study awaiting classification. Participants in the included studies were aged between 27 and 78 years, and there were roughly the same number of men and women involved.
The studies we included had to be randomised controlled trials with at least three months of follow-up that evaluated full-mouth scaling and root planing within 24 hours. Both FMS and FMD were compared to conventional quadrant scaling and root planing, which was the control group. Participants had to have a clinical diagnosis of chronic periodontitis according to the International Classification of Periodontal Diseases. We excluded studies of people with aggressive periodontitis, systemic disorders or who were taking antibiotics.


Key results

Treatment effects of FMS and FMD compared to conventional scaling and root planing (SRP) are modest and there are no clear implications for periodontal care. Harms and adverse events were reported in eight studies. The most important harm identified was an increased body temperature after FMS or FMD treatments. In practice, the decision to select one approach to non-surgical periodontal therapy over another can include patient preference and the convenience of the treatment schedule.


Quality of the evidence

The quality of the evidence is low for all treatment comparisons and outcomes. This is due to the small number of studies and participants involved and limitations in the study designs. Future research is likely to change findings.
Authors' conclusions: 

The inclusion of five additional RCTs in this updated review comparing the clinical effects of conventional mechanical treatment with FMS and FMD approaches for the treatment of chronic periodontitis has not changed the conclusions of the original review. From the twelve included trials there is no clear evidence that FMS or FMD provide additional benefit compared to conventional scaling and root planing. In practice, the decision to select one approach to non-surgical periodontal therapy over another should include patient preference and the convenience of the treatment schedule.