METHODS: Two independent reviewers (KY and SJ) screened two electronic databases, PubMed and Scopus, for randomized clinical trials on the use of systemic doxycycline as an adjunct to scaling and root planing in improving periodontal status and glycemic control in diabetic patients with periodontitis using predetermined selection criteria within a 3-month period. The reviewers independently did data screening, data selection, data extraction and risk of bias. Quality of studies involved was analysed using the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0. Weighted standard mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using a random effects meta-analysis model. Publication bias was evaluated using funnel plot. Quality of evidence was evaluated by Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
RESULTS: Electronic searches provided 1358 records and six studies were selected. The meta-analyses indicated that there was no statistically significant difference in the improvement of periodontal status with the use of systemic doxycycline as an adjunct for scaling and root planing (SRP). SMD of clinical attachment levels (- 0.22 [- 0.52, 0.08]) and HbA1c levels (- 0.13 [- 0.41, 0.15]) were calculated. Overall risk of bias is high in 2 out of 6 studies involved.
CONCLUSION: Systemic doxycycline when used in addition to scaling and root planing yields no significant improvement of clinical attachment levels for periodontal status and reduction of HbA1c levels in treatment of diabetic patients with periodontitis when comparing the test group to the control group.
METHODS: The selected patients were divided into three groups, Group I (PDT + SRP), Group II (SP + SRP) and group III (SRP alone). Clinical inflammatory periodontal parameters including plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD) and clinical attachment level (CAL) gain were assessed. Assessment of crevicular fluid interleukin (IL)-6 and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) was performed using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay technique. All measurements were recorded at baseline, 3 months and 6 months follow-up periods, respectively.
RESULTS: A total of 73 patients completed the study. A significant improvement in the BOP was seen in Group II at both follow up visits when compared with other groups (p < 0.05). Only in Group-I that showed statistically significant reduction in moderate periodontal pockets at 3 months (p = 0.021), and significant reductions in deep pockets at 3-months (p = 0.003) and 6-months (p = 0.002), respectively. CAL gain also was reported to be seen in group-I at both visits (p < 0.05). Group- I and II significantly reduced the levels of IL-6 at 3-month period compared to Group-III. This reduction was further maintained by group-II and group-III at 6 months, respectively. TNF-α showed statistically significant decrease in Group II as compared to Group I and Group-III and this reduction was maintained by the end of 6-month visit (p = 0.045).
CONCLUSION: Both the treatment modalities PDT and SP helped in reducing periodontal inflammation. PDT reported significant gain in clinical attachment level, whereas the SP significantly reduced the bleeding levels.