Clinical effects of root instrumentation using conventional steel or non-tooth substance removing plastic curettes during supportive periodontal therapy (SPT)

Aim of the study

To compare the clinical efficacy of steel and plastic curettes for subgingival instrumentation.

Materials and methods

40 patients on maintenance were divided into two groups. Plastic curettes were used on the experimental group and steel curettes on the control group. The criteria for the selection of patients included a gingival bleeding index (on probing) of between 17 and 49 % and a pocket depth of at least 5 mm. The clinical parameters were evaluated at baseline, 10 days and at 3-6 months.

Results

The bleeding index reduced considerably for both groups between baseline and 10 days (from 27 to 15 %, on average). There was a return to initial values by 3-6 months. Pocket depths did not change between baseline and 3-6 months for either group.

Conclusion

The return of the indices to initial values after 3-6 months shows the importance of regular maintenance in a population with average standards of oral hygiene. Neither type of instrument damaged the root surfaces and, as both were effective, they are recommended by the authors.

Commentary

Because pockets have to be instrumented regularly, the absence of damage to the root surfaces constitutes progress. The authors ascribe the greatest importance to the removal of subgingival bacteria and the endotoxins which adhere to root surfaces.