10052022_JOP_Mostafa Flashcards
(9 cards)
Zucchelli 2019 PSTD classification. What are the most common classes/subclasses according to Tavelli 2022
- Crown longer than homologous tooth was most common.
- Class III & IV were most common (58%)
- Subclass B & C were most common (92%)
According to Tavelli 2022, what are the risk indicators of PSTDs?
- Positive correlation between presence of adj. implants (OR: 14.4) > years of function and BBD with (~ OR: 2 for both) PSTDs
- Inverse correlation between KMW, MT and BBT with PSTDs (OR: 0.5 - 0.1)
For single GR tx, what study looked at efficacy of CAF alone vs. CAF + CM vs. CAF + XDM?
Santamaria 2022.
CAF alone vs. CAF + CM (mucograft) vs. CAF + XDM (mucoderm)
- In all 3 tx, there was SS intragroup improvement in Rec Red, % root coverage, CRC and dentin hypersentitivity.
- CRC was 2x as much in CAF and CAF + CM groups compared to CAF + XDM
** SS improvement in GT with CAF + matrices vs. CAF alone
- if KT < 2 mm -> CAF or CAF + CM were better at RecRed & % Root coverage
- if KT < 2 mm -> GT gain was higher in test groups compared to control (CAF only)
TAKE HOME
No difference in single recession treatment outcomes with either CAF alone or with the addition of xenogenic matrices. However, xenogenic matrices can help augment gingival thickness
How does Er:YAG compare with SRP?
JOP Garpegui
Er:YAG vs SRP, an RCT. 2,940 nm wavelength. Use 100-180 with a 160 MJ power flow – this study used only 50MJ after SRP. NSSD, but patients preferred laser & laser was faster.
Mnemonic: Using Er:YAG is like having a pet Gar-penguin, it’s a hassle and doesn’t make any positive difference in your life
How does Nd:YAG compare to SRP?
JOP Dortaj
Nd:YAG for periodontitis = 1064 nm wavelength. All the laser effect was through recession. Laser had 1mm more recession than the control group (Laser = 2mm total recession, SRP only control = 1mm recession). CAL was about 0.5 mm more in laser group, but that effect decreased over time = basically no difference. No stents or standardization (per dr Wang)
Mnemonic: “Don’t touch (Dortaj) Nd:YAG since it doesn’t work”
What study looked at the tx outcomes for furcations in SRP?
Majzoub: Furcation molars OFD + SRP vs. SRP only. Retrospective.
Furcation classification:
VERTICAL:
- Tonetti 2017 – Class A, B, C (bone loss to coronal 1/3, mid third, apical third)
- Tarnow and Fletcher - Grade A, B and C (1-3, 4-6 & 7+ mm from furcation
HORIZONTAL
- Hamp 1973 – Degree 1, 2, 3 (<3mm, >3mm, through-and-through)
AAP Regeneration workshop regarding Furc. Tx:
- Class I: regenerative therapy
may be beneficial in certain clinical scenarios, although most Class I furcation defects may be successfully treated with non-regenerative therapy.
- Class II: Periodontal regeneration has been demonstrated histologically and clinically
- Class III: limited evidence regarding GTR
** Less CAL gain, PD reduction and more recession in higher level FI (Grade 2, 3 & class C FI)
** Molars with minimal horizontal involvement (Degree 1) and lower vertical involvement (Class A & B) –> most CAL gain with minimal REC.
FI teeth w/ Degree 3 and Class C, respectively –> lower levels of CAL gain, high levels of REC
** Supportive periodontal therapy frequency, as well as the horizontal and vertical extent of involvement significantly affected the survival of FI teeth undergoing maintenance therapy.
Does ARP reduce the need for simultaneous GBR at implant placement? How about the effect of Bucc Bone thickness (BBT)?
SR by Avila Ortiz in 2019:
Extensive post-extraction horizontal (~ 2 mm) and vertical (midbuccal: 1.72 mm, midlingual: 1.16 mm) ridge resorption can be prevented by ARP therapy
- Need for simult. GBR:
- USH –> 60% (65% had thin phenotype)
- ARP –> 11 % (90% had thin phenotype)
- ARP vs. USH –> Odds of not needing ancillary GBR in the ARP group was 17.8X higher
- Every 1 mm increase in facial bone thickness reduced the need for ancillary GBR by 7.7X
How does the UK classification of Periodontitis compare to the United States (2017 World Workshop) one?
JOP Dukka
Compared the performance of the UK Periodontitis classification vs. the 2017 WW classifications. The UK one only looks at bone loss, basically. Similar performance among both
prognostic performance of the BSP stage and extent was slightly better than the 2017 WWC stage, while the 2017 WWC grade demonstrated a better performance than the BSP-i grade.
Mnemonic: the UK periodontists “duck away” (Dukka” from using CAL
How does staging & grading correlate with the tooth loss?
ELSAYED
2018 WW predictive value for tooth loss. Stage III, IV = more tooth loss; however, much depends on the compliance with SPT.
Ravida 2021: Higher concomitant staging and grading corresponded to greater risk for TLP and generalized extent only became a significant predictor in patients with stage IV or grade C disease.
