MATERIALS AND METHODS: The valuation composed of 30 subjects with aggressive periodontal disease and 30 healthy controls. Clinical assessment included following periodontal parameters: plaque index (PI), papillary bleeding index (PBI), probing pocket depth (PPD), and clinical attachment level (CAL). Levels of bone loss were assessed by taking full-mouth periapical radiographs. Initial periodontal therapy comprises of full-mouth disinfection which includes subgingival scaling and root planing within 24 hours combined with adjunctive chlorhexidine chemotherapy for aggressive periodontitis subject's at sites indicated. The parameters (clinical) were evaluated at the baseline and 8 weeks after initial periodontal therapy at six sites of teeth indicated. Plasma samples were taken and evaluated by standard procedures as defined in the literature. All the values were weighed and related.
RESULTS: Strong positive associations were detected among periodontal parameters and TBARS, enzymatic/nonenzymatic AO levels (p < 0.05), and pre- and postperiodontal management. The plasma levels of patients with aggressive periodontitis had high levels of TBARS and displayed a substantial escalation in the activities of GSH and GPX levels in the plasma matched to the healthy individuals (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: This paper evaluated ROS activity and AO defense before and after treatment to stimulate added periodontal investigation in this part which will give an insight into the therapeutic options with foreseeable results.
METHODS: 240 extracted human teeth were sectioned to obtain 6 mm of the middle third of the root. The root canal was enlarged to an internal diameter of 0.9 mm. The specimens were inoculated with E. faecalis for 21 days. Following this, specimens were randomly divided into eight groups (n = 30) according to the intracanal medicament placed: group I: saline, group II: chitosan, group III: propolis100 µg/ml (P100), group IV: propolis 250 µg/ml (P250), group V: chitosan-propolis nanoparticle 100 µg/ml (CPN100), group VI: chitosan-propolis nanoparticle 250 µg/ml (CPN250), group VII: calcium hydroxide(CH) and group VIII: 2% chlorhexidine (CHX) gel. Dentine shavings were collected at 200 and 400 μm depths, and total numbers of CFUs were determined at the end of day one, three and seven. The non-parametric Kruskal Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests were used to compare the differences in reduction of CFUs between all groups and probability values of p
METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed using Pubmed, Web of Science, INAHTA and GIN databases, from inception to June 4, 2020. Three independent reviewers selected eligible studies then extracted and synthesized the evidence. The synthesis was submitted to a multidisciplinary group of experts to provide recommendations.
RESULTS: Two scientific papers and a Malaysian HTA report were included in data synthesis. In light of the resources consulted, spraying disinfectants on humans in booths is not effective and can be toxic. Disinfectants are intended for use on surfaces, not on living tissue and spraying disinfectants on the outside of the body does not kill the virus inside an infected person's body. Furthermore, this procedure may increase the risk of neglecting other effective measures.
CONCLUSION: It is recommended to prohibit the use of disinfection booths in all structures.