Treating periodontitis-A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing ultrasonic and subgingival hand scaling at different pocket probing depths.
Abstract Background: Mechanical plaque removal has been commonly accepted to be the basis for periodontitis treatment. The study aims to compare the effectiveness of ultrasonic subgingival scaling and subgingival hand scaling at different initial pocket probing depths in periodontitis treatment. Methods: Public databases were searched. Weighted mean pocket probing depths and clinical attachment loss reduction differences estimated by random effects model. Results: Ten randomized controlled trials were included out of 1,434 identified. Selected outcomes were pocket probing depth and clinical attachment loss. Initial pocket probing depth and follow-up periods formed subgroups. For 3-month follow-up: (1) too few shallow initial pocket studies available; (2) medium depth studies were unmergeable; (3) deep studies were adequate. No statistical differences between pocket probing depth nor clinical attachment loss reduction between ultrasound and hand groups. For 6-month follow-up: (1) too few shallow initial pocket probing depth studies for analysis; (2) medium initial pocket probing depth studies favored hand scaling. No statistical differences observed in clinical attachment loss reduction between the two approaches; (3) deep initial pocket probing depth studies showed hand scaling superior by both measures. Conclusion: When initial pocket probing depths were ≥4mm, pocket probing depth results, clinical attachment loss reduction, and other outcomes indicated subgingival hand scaling was superior. When operation duration and comfort were considered, ultrasonic debridement was.