You are here

Home » Content

DEĞİŞİK SEVİYELERDE ALVEOL KEMİK KAYIPLI DİŞLERİN FARKLI PERIODONTAL TEDAVİLERE VERDİĞİ YANITIN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

EVALUATION OF RESPONSE TO THE DIFFERNT PERIODONTAL TREATMENT OF TEETH WITH ALVEOL HONE LOSS AT VARIOUS LEVELS

Journal Name:

  • Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 1999

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
The purpose of this study, wis to compare Lhe differences on probing dcpl'i and clinical attachment level after treatment, by applying three different therapy modalities to the teeth which have moderate periodontal pocket depth (4-6 mm), and have, alveol bone loss aL various levels. 57 patients (13 12 teeth) with Advanced periodontitis were taken into study. Probing Pocket Depth (PPD). Clinical Attachment Level (CAL) measurement of each tooth were performed basalinc. Intraoral radiographs were taken with standart parallel method by using Radiovisiography (RVG) system. The amount of alveol bone loss on these radiographs was counted throuhg the ''measure*' function of the system. The teeth were classified into 5 groups, I: 0-3 ram, II; 3.5-6 mm. Ill; 6.5-9 mm, IV: 9.5-12 mm. V: 12.5 mm and more, according to the amuont of alveol bone loss. Alter 4-5 weeks of giving the patient oral hygeu intmction and having their teeth scaled, 77 of gu a d rant s (460 teeth) which have the similar features were treated with the Root Planing (R1J) under local anaslhesia, smother 76 (430 teeth) were treated with the Modified Widman Hap prosedüre (MWF), other 75(422 leclh) were treated with Flap Operation inclined to pocket elimination (FO). The patients were recalled to the periodical controls monthly tor profesional tooth cleaning, In the 12th month following therapy all clinical measures at the baseline were re-performcd. The data achived were compared by using variance analysis according to the alveol hone loss groups and therapy modalities. While mean overall probing reduction amount was FO>MWF>RP in five alveol bone loss groups according to therapy modalities, it was !=II>[II>]V^V in three therapy modalities according to the alveol bone loss groups (p<0.05). Mean overall amount of changes in CAL was Rf*>MWF>hO in five groups according to therapy modalities (p<0.05). Thus, there was attachment gam those teeth treated with RP in five alveol bone loss groups. On the other hand, those treated with MWF and K) in the I., II., III. groups reflected attachment gain, but in IV, and V groups there was attachment loss. According to alveol loss groups, the mean overall a mount of changes in attachment was I>1I>II[>IV=:V in three therapy modalities (p<0.05)- The results indicated that the changes in the PPD and CAL were reflected differently in term of both the therapy modality and alveol bone loss level
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bu çahşmanm amacı; değişik oranlarda alvcol kemik kaybı olan orta derinlikte (4-6 mm) periodontal ceplere sahip dişilere üç farklı tedavi yöntemi uygulayarak tedavi sonrası cep derinliği ve klinik alaşman seviyesinde oluşan değişiklikleri karşılaştırmaktı. İlerlemiş periodontüisli 57 hasta (1312 diş) çalışmada yer aldı. Başlangıçta her dişin Sondlanabilen Cep Derinliği (SCD) ve Klinik Ataşman Seviyesi (KAS) saptandı. Ağız içi standart paralel radyogramlar Radiovisiography (RVG) sistemi kullanılarak alındı. Bu radyogramlardan alveol kemik kaybı miktarı sistemin "measure" fonksiyonu ile hesaplandı. Dişler alveol kemik kaybı miktarına göre (I) 0-3 mm, (II) 3.5-6 mm, (111) 6.5-9 mm, (IV) 9,5-12 mm, (V) 12,5 mm ve daha fazla olmak flzere beş gruba ayrıldı-Hastalara oral hijyen eğitimi ve diş yüzeyi temizliği yapıldıktan 4-5 hafta sonra benzer özellik gösteren segmentlerin 77'si (460 diş) lokal anestezi altında Kök Yüzeyi Düzlesnrmesi (KYD)T 76'sı (430 diş) Modifiye Widman Rap operasyonu (MWF) ve 75'i (422 diş) cep eliminasyomına yönelik Flap Operasyonu (FO) ile tedavi edildi. Hastalar profesyonel diş temizliği için her ay periyodik kontrollere çağrıldı. Tedaviyi takiben I2.ayda başlangıçta alınan lümklînik ölçümler yeniden alındı. Elde edilen veriler alveol kemik kaybı gruplarına ve tedavi yöntemlerine göre varyans analizi uygulanarak karşılaştırıldı. Cep derinliğinde ortalama azalma miktarı tedavi yöntemlerine göre beş alveol kemik kaybı grubunda da FO>MWF>KYD şeklindeyken, alveol kemik kaybı gruplarına göre üç tedavi yönteminde de I-II>III>IV=V seklindeydi (p<0.05). KAS'de ortalama değişiklik mi klan tedavi yöntemlerine göre bea grupta KYD>MWF>FO şeklindeydi (jx0.Q5). Ancak KYD ile tedavi edilen beş grup dişte de atanman kazancı varken, MWF ve FO ile tedavi edilen I., II. ve İÜ. grup dişlerde ataşman kazancı, IV. ve V. grtıp dişler ise ataşman kaybı gözlendi. Alveol kemik kaybı gruplarına göre 3 tedavi yönteminde de ortalama ataşmahdaki değişiklik miktarı I>II>III>IV=V şeHindeydi (p<0.Ü5), Elde edilen sonuçlar. tedavi yöntemleri ve alveol kemik kaybı seviyesine bağlı olarak SCD ve KAS'daki değişimlerin farklı olduğunu gösterdi.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-degisik-seviyelerde-alveol-kemik-kayipli-dislerin-farkli-periodontal-tedavilere-verdigi-yanitin-degerlendirilmesi.pdf
  • 2
25-30
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

1. Badesten A, Nilvcus R, Egelberg J. Effect of nonsurgical periodontal therapy, J Clin Periodontal 1981; 8: 57-72.
2. Caffcsse RG, Sweney PL, Smith BA. Scaling and root planing with and without periodontal flap surgery. J Clin Periodontal 1986; 13:205-210.
3. Knowfes JW, Burgett FG, Morrison EC, Nissle RR, Ramfjord SP. Comparison of results following three modalities of periodontal therapy releled to tooth type and initial pocket depth. J Clin Periodontal E980; 7: 32^17.
4. Litıdhe J, Westfelt E, Nyman S, Socransky S, Heijl L, rirantthall G. Healing following surgical/nonsurgical treatment of periodontal disease. A Clinical Study. J Clin Periodontal 1982; ft 115-128.
5. Knowles JW, Burgett FG, Nissle RR, Sbick RA, Morrison EC, Ramfjord SP. Results of periodontal treatment related to pocket depth and attachment level. Eight years. J Periodontal 1979; 50: 225-233.
6. Pihistrom Bl,, Mc Hugh RB, Oliphant TH, Ortiz-Campaz C. Comparison of surgical and iron surgical treatment of periodontal disease, A review of current studies and additional result after 6 1/2 years. J Clin Pcriodontol 1983; 10: 524-541.
7. Ramfjord SP, Caffesse RO, Morrison BC, Hill RW, Kerry GJ, et all. Four modalities of periodontal treatment compared over five years. J Clin Periodontal
I9S7; !4: 445-452. -
8. Becker W, Becker BE, Oschenbcin C, Kerry G, Caffcsse RG, et all. A longitudinal study comparing scaling osseous surgery and modified widman procedures. Results sfterone year. J Periodontol 1988; 59: 351-365.
9- Fles/ar TJ, Knowles JW, Morrison EC, Burgctl FG, Nissle RR, Ramfjord SP. Tooth mobility and periodontal therapy. J Clin Periodontol 1980; 7: 49.5005
10. Newcomb GM, Nixon KC. Microbiological assays as predictors of the response to periodontal therapy. Aust Dent J 1990; 35: 261-265.
11. Westfelt E, Bragd L, Soncransky SS, Haffajc AD, Nyman S, et all. Improved periodontal conditions following therapy. J Clin Periodontol 1 985; 12: 283-293.
12. Roslîng B, Nyman S, Lmdhe J. The effect of systematic plaque control on bone regeneration in infrabony pockets. J Clin Periodontal J 976; 3: 38-53.
13. Lindhe J, Ericsson I.The influence of trauma from occlusion on reduced but healty periodontal tissues in the dog. J Clin Periodontol 1976: 3: 110-122.
14. Burgett FG, RamljoTd SP, Nissle RR, Morrison EC, Charbencau 113, Caffesse RG. A randomized (rial of occlusal adjustment in the treatment of periodontiiis patients. J Clin Periodontol 1992; 19; 381-387.
15. Neiderud AM, Ericsson 1, Lindhe J. Probing pocket depth at mobile /non mobile teeth. .1 Clin Periodontol 1992; 19; 754-759.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com