LAUSR

BACKGROUND The removal of subgingival calculus to obtain gingival health is an integral part of non-surgical periodontal therapy. The periodontal endoscope is used by some clinicians to help enhance access to effectively remove subgingival calculus, however, longer term studies on this subject are still lacking. The purpose of this randomized, controlled clinical trial was to compare the clinical outcomes of scaling and root planing (SRP) using a periodontal endoscope versus conventional SRP using loupes for up to twelve months, utilizing a split-mouth design. METHODS Twenty-five (25) patients were recruited for the study that exhibited generalized stage II or stage III periodontitis. SRP was rendered by the same experienced hygienist using either a periodontal endoscope or conventional SRP using loupes, following random assignment of the left or right half of the mouth. All the periodontal evaluations were done by the same periodontal resident at baseline, one month, three months, six months, and twelve months after therapy. RESULTS Single-rooted teeth interproximal sites displayed a significantly lower percentage of improved sites (P <0.05) than multi-rooted teeth for probing depth (PD) and clinical attachment level (CAL). Maxillary multi-rooted interproximal sites favored the use of the periodontal endoscope at the three- and six-month time periods (P = 0.017 and 0.019 respectively) in terms of percentage of sites with improved CAL. Mandibular multi-rooted interproximal sites showed more sites with improved CAL using conventional SRP than with the use of the periodontal endoscope (P <0.05). CONCLUSION Overall, the use of a periodontal endoscope was more beneficial in multi-rooted sites compared to single-rooted sites, specifically in maxillary multi-rooted sites. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.