EAO‐260 / OC‐BR‐007 | Efficacy of air‐polishing devices in disinfecting implant surfaces in a non‐surgical simulation

Abstract Background The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the surgical training of residents. There is a real concern that trainees will not be able to meet their training requirements. Low-fidelity surgical simulation appears to be an alternative for surgical training. The educational benefits of repeating ossiculoplasty simulations under a microscope have never been evaluated. With this study we aimed to evaluate the differences in performance scores and on a global rating scale before and after training on an ossiculoplasty simulator. Methods In this quasi-experimental, prospective, single-centre, before-after study with blinded rater evaluation, residents performed five microscopic ossiculoplasty tasks with a difficulty gradient (sliding beads onto rods, the insertion of a partial prosthesis, the insertion of a total prosthesis, and the insertion of a stapedotomy piston under microscopic or endoscopic surgery) before and after training on the same simulator. Performance scores were defined for each task, and total performance scores (score/min) were calculated. All data were collected prospectively. Results Six out of seven intermediate residents and 8/9 novices strongly agreed that the simulator was an effective training device and should be included in the ENT residency program. The mean effect of training was a significant increase in the total performance score (+ 0.52 points/min, [95 % CI, 0.40–0.64], p < 0.001), without a significant difference between novice and intermediate residents. Conclusions This preliminary study shows that techniques for middle-ear surgery can be acquired using a simulator, avoiding any risk for patients, even under lockdown measures.

Download Full-text

Efficacy of erythritol powder air‐polishing in active and supportive periodontal therapy: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

International Journal of Dental Hygiene ◽

10.1111/idh.12539 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Hayder R Abdulbaqi ◽

Muhammad Saad Shaikh ◽

Ali A Abdulkareem ◽

Muhammad S Zafar ◽

Sarhang S Gul ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Periodontal Therapy ◽

Air Polishing ◽

Supportive Periodontal Therapy

Download Full-text

A 12-month randomized controlled trial evaluating erythritol air-polishing versus curette/ultrasonic debridement of mandibular furcations in supportive periodontal therapy

BMC Oral Health ◽

10.1186/s12903-021-01397-3 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 21 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Ingvild M. Ulvik ◽

Terje Sæthre ◽

Dagmar F. Bunæs ◽

Stein Atle Lie ◽

Morten Enersen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Randomized Controlled Trial ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Clinical Attachment Level ◽

Treatment Difference ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Air Polishing ◽

Probing Depth ◽

Furcation Defects ◽

Supportive Periodontal Therapy ◽

Attachment Level

Abstract Background Due to complex morphology and limited access, the cleaning of the furcation area is extremely challenging. Therefore, novel therapeutic approaches need to be tested to potentially overcome debridement limitations. The aim of the present prospective 12-month study was to compare clinical and microbiological effects following erythritol air-polishing versus conventional mechanical debridement of furcation defects in a cohort of periodontal maintenance patients. Methods Twenty patients with grade II mandibular molar furcation defects volunteered to enroll in this single-centre, examiner masked, randomized controlled trial. In a split-mouth study design, two furcation sites in each patient were randomly assigned to either receive subgingival debridement using erythritol air-polishing (test) or conventional ultrasonic/curette debridement (control) at baseline, and at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. Probing depth, clinical attachment level and bleeding on probing were recorded at 3-month intervals. Subgingival microbiological samples obtained at baseline, 6 and 12 months were analyzed using checkerboard DNA–DNA hybridization. Discomfort from treatment was scored at 12 months using a visual analogue scale. The differences between treatments, and time-points, were tested using multilevel analysis (mixed effect models and robust variance estimates). Results A significant reduction in probing depth took place following both treatments (p < 0.001). Control sites experienced a significant mean gain in clinical attachment level of 0.5 mm (± 0.2) (p = 0.004), whereas a non-significant gain of 0.4 mm (± 0.3) was observed at test sites (p = 0.119). At 6 months, a significant between-treatment difference of 0.8 mm (± 0.4) was observed in favor of the control (p = 0.032). No significant between-treatment differences were observed in microbial load or composition. Notably, at 12 months patients experienced significantly less discomfort following air-polishing compared with control (p = 0.001). Conclusions The 12-month observations indicate that erythritol air-polishing and conventional mechanical debridement both support clinical improvements. A significant between-treatment difference in clinical attachment level was, however, detected in favour of control debridement at 6 months. In terms of patient comfort, erythritol air-polishing is superior. Trial Registration: The clinical trial was retrospectively registered in ClinicalTrial.gov with registration NCT04493398 (07/28/2020).

Download Full-text