Premium
Efficacy of subgingivally applied minocycline in the treatment of chronic periodontitis
Author(s) -
Lu HseinKun,
Chei ChongJi
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
journal of periodontal research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.31
H-Index - 83
eISSN - 1600-0765
pISSN - 0022-3484
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-0765.2004.00763.x
Subject(s) - minocycline , medicine , scaling and root planing , dentistry , bleeding on probing , chronic periodontitis , periodontitis , gingival and periodontal pocket , clinical attachment loss , randomized controlled trial , adjunctive treatment , antibiotics , microbiology and biotechnology , biology
Background: The use of adjunctive minocycline with mechanical debridement in treating periodontitis has been widely studied using different methods. However, the results from these studies are equivocal. Objective: The purpose of this study was to clarify the efficacy of the adjunctive use of subgingival minocycline application plus scaling/root planing as compared with the results of one episode of scaling/root planing in the treatment of chronic periodontitis. Methods: Fifteen patients were enrolled in this split‐mouth clinical trial. Probing depth, clinical attachment loss, gingival index, and bleeding on probing were evaluated at the baseline before scaling/root planing and 6, 10, 14, and 18 weeks later according to a single‐blind protocol. The amount of interleukin‐1β (interleukin‐1β pg/site) at each lesion was also simultaneously measured in gingival crevicular fluid in a parallel comparison design. After full‐mouth baseline measurements and scaling/root planing, 78 lesions with a residual mean probing depth of 5 mm at anterior teeth were selected and equally distributed in either right or left sites based on a split‐mouth symmetrical design and randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups (with or without minocycline administration, n = 39 for each group). Results: Probing depth significantly decreased from the baseline (week 0) to week 6 after scaling/root planing ( p < 0.05) in both groups, but there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups ( p > 0.05). However, at weeks 10, 14, and 18, the experimental group showed significantly greater improvement in pocket reduction than the control group ( p < 0.05). Similarly, both groups also showed significant decreases in gingival index scores from weeks 0–6 ( p < 0.05), but gingival index reductions at weeks 10, 14, and 18 were statistically significant in favor of the experimental group ( p < 0.05). The experimental group had more attachment gain than the control group at weeks 14 and 18 ( p < 0.05). Values of interleukin‐1β (pg/site) at the experimental sites were significantly reduced at weeks 10, 14, and 18, as compared to values at control sites ( p < 0.01). Finally, the incidence of bleeding on probing showed no differences between the two groups for any time interval ( p > 0.05). Conclusions: In this 18‐week clinical trial, the results suggested that scaling/root planing with adjunctive subgingival administration of minocycline ointment has a significantly better and prolonged effect compared to scaling/root planing alone on the reduction of probing depth, clinical attachment loss, gingival index, and interleukin‐1β content, but not on bleeding on probing.