是否真的有必要在牙周炎的手术治疗中使用甲硝唑作为辅助手段?

Q3 Dentistry
Ana Luisa Amaral, Bodil Lund, Sérgio Araújo Andrade
{"title":"是否真的有必要在牙周炎的手术治疗中使用甲硝唑作为辅助手段?","authors":"Ana Luisa Amaral, Bodil Lund, Sérgio Araújo Andrade","doi":"10.1038/s41432-024-01027-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Prospective, parallel, randomized, double-blind, clinical trial. Participants were at least 30 years old, who were systemically healthy, with stages III-IV, grades B-C periodontitis. Of the 50 eligible individuals for the study, 40 were divided into 2 equal groups. The test group received doses of 500 mg of metronidazole, while the control group received a placebo, both administered three times a day for 7 days, commencing immediately after periodontal surgery. All patients were followed up at 3-, 6-, 9-, and 12-months post-surgery. The study utilized probing depth, clinical attachment level, bleeding on probing, and plaque index as parameters for determining the outcomes at each assessment. Microbiological samples were collected for the detection and quantification of Porphyromonas gingivalis, Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans, and Tannerella forsythia DNA. In order to analyze quantitative variables in a comparison between the test and control groups, Student’s t-tests or Mann-Whitney U tests were utilized. For categorical results, chi-square or Fisher tests were employed. For both probing depth and clinical attachment level, repeated measures ANOVA was used. The statistical significance level was set at p ≤ 0.05. The study found statistically significant differences for probing depth (mean difference, MD = 0.31 mm, 95% confidence interval, CI [0.13; 0.49]; p = 0.001) and clinical attachment level (MD = 0.64 mm, 95% CI [0.02; 1.27]; p = 0.044) only 3 months after surgery, with a reduction observed in the test group. However, despite being statistically significant, these results lack clinical relevance. Although the study found statistically significant results for clinical attachment level (MD = 0.66 mm, 95% CI [0.01; 1.31]; p = 0.045) and probing depth (MD = 0.28 mm, 95% CI [0.09; 0.46]; p = 0.004), these findings do not represent clinically significant gains. Therefore, no evidence was demonstrated to support the use of systemic metronidazole as adjunctive therapy to periodontal surgery.","PeriodicalId":12234,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-based dentistry","volume":"25 4","pages":"180-181"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41432-024-01027-1.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Would it really be necessary to use metronidazole as an adjunct in the surgical treatment of periodontitis?\",\"authors\":\"Ana Luisa Amaral, Bodil Lund, Sérgio Araújo Andrade\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41432-024-01027-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Prospective, parallel, randomized, double-blind, clinical trial. Participants were at least 30 years old, who were systemically healthy, with stages III-IV, grades B-C periodontitis. Of the 50 eligible individuals for the study, 40 were divided into 2 equal groups. The test group received doses of 500 mg of metronidazole, while the control group received a placebo, both administered three times a day for 7 days, commencing immediately after periodontal surgery. All patients were followed up at 3-, 6-, 9-, and 12-months post-surgery. The study utilized probing depth, clinical attachment level, bleeding on probing, and plaque index as parameters for determining the outcomes at each assessment. Microbiological samples were collected for the detection and quantification of Porphyromonas gingivalis, Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans, and Tannerella forsythia DNA. In order to analyze quantitative variables in a comparison between the test and control groups, Student’s t-tests or Mann-Whitney U tests were utilized. For categorical results, chi-square or Fisher tests were employed. For both probing depth and clinical attachment level, repeated measures ANOVA was used. The statistical significance level was set at p ≤ 0.05. The study found statistically significant differences for probing depth (mean difference, MD = 0.31 mm, 95% confidence interval, CI [0.13; 0.49]; p = 0.001) and clinical attachment level (MD = 0.64 mm, 95% CI [0.02; 1.27]; p = 0.044) only 3 months after surgery, with a reduction observed in the test group. However, despite being statistically significant, these results lack clinical relevance. Although the study found statistically significant results for clinical attachment level (MD = 0.66 mm, 95% CI [0.01; 1.31]; p = 0.045) and probing depth (MD = 0.28 mm, 95% CI [0.09; 0.46]; p = 0.004), these findings do not represent clinically significant gains. Therefore, no evidence was demonstrated to support the use of systemic metronidazole as adjunctive therapy to periodontal surgery.\",\"PeriodicalId\":12234,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evidence-based dentistry\",\"volume\":\"25 4\",\"pages\":\"180-181\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41432-024-01027-1.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evidence-based dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41432-024-01027-1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Dentistry\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence-based dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41432-024-01027-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

设计前瞻性、平行、随机、双盲临床试验:数据分析:在 50 名符合条件的研究人员中,40 人被分为两个等量组:数据分析:在符合研究条件的 50 人中,40 人被分为两个相同的组。试验组服用 500 毫克甲硝唑,对照组服用安慰剂,每天三次,连续 7 天,从牙周手术后立即开始。所有患者在手术后 3 个月、6 个月、9 个月和 12 个月接受随访。研究采用探诊深度、临床附着水平、探诊出血量和牙菌斑指数作为参数,以确定每次评估的结果。研究人员收集了微生物样本,用于检测和量化牙龈卟啉单胞菌、放线菌和连翘丹那菌的 DNA。为了对测试组和对照组之间的定量变量进行比较分析,采用了学生 t 检验或 Mann-Whitney U 检验。对于分类结果,则采用卡方检验或费雪检验。对于探查深度和临床附着水平,采用重复测量方差分析。统计显著性水平设定为 p ≤ 0.05:研究发现,探查深度(平均差,MD = 0.31 mm,95% 置信区间,CI [0.13; 0.49];p = 0.001)和临床附着水平(MD = 0.64 mm,95% 置信区间,CI [0.02; 1.27];p = 0.044)在术后 3 个月才出现统计学意义上的显著差异,测试组的差异有所减小。然而,尽管这些结果具有统计学意义,但缺乏临床相关性:尽管研究发现临床附着水平(MD = 0.66 mm,95% CI [0.01;1.31];p = 0.045)和探诊深度(MD = 0.28 mm,95% CI [0.09;0.46];p = 0.004)的结果具有统计学意义,但这些结果并不代表具有临床意义。因此,没有证据支持将全身用甲硝唑作为牙周手术的辅助疗法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Would it really be necessary to use metronidazole as an adjunct in the surgical treatment of periodontitis?
Prospective, parallel, randomized, double-blind, clinical trial. Participants were at least 30 years old, who were systemically healthy, with stages III-IV, grades B-C periodontitis. Of the 50 eligible individuals for the study, 40 were divided into 2 equal groups. The test group received doses of 500 mg of metronidazole, while the control group received a placebo, both administered three times a day for 7 days, commencing immediately after periodontal surgery. All patients were followed up at 3-, 6-, 9-, and 12-months post-surgery. The study utilized probing depth, clinical attachment level, bleeding on probing, and plaque index as parameters for determining the outcomes at each assessment. Microbiological samples were collected for the detection and quantification of Porphyromonas gingivalis, Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans, and Tannerella forsythia DNA. In order to analyze quantitative variables in a comparison between the test and control groups, Student’s t-tests or Mann-Whitney U tests were utilized. For categorical results, chi-square or Fisher tests were employed. For both probing depth and clinical attachment level, repeated measures ANOVA was used. The statistical significance level was set at p ≤ 0.05. The study found statistically significant differences for probing depth (mean difference, MD = 0.31 mm, 95% confidence interval, CI [0.13; 0.49]; p = 0.001) and clinical attachment level (MD = 0.64 mm, 95% CI [0.02; 1.27]; p = 0.044) only 3 months after surgery, with a reduction observed in the test group. However, despite being statistically significant, these results lack clinical relevance. Although the study found statistically significant results for clinical attachment level (MD = 0.66 mm, 95% CI [0.01; 1.31]; p = 0.045) and probing depth (MD = 0.28 mm, 95% CI [0.09; 0.46]; p = 0.004), these findings do not represent clinically significant gains. Therefore, no evidence was demonstrated to support the use of systemic metronidazole as adjunctive therapy to periodontal surgery.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Evidence-based dentistry
Evidence-based dentistry Dentistry-Dentistry (all)
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
77
期刊介绍: Evidence-Based Dentistry delivers the best available evidence on the latest developments in oral health. We evaluate the evidence and provide guidance concerning the value of the author''s conclusions. We keep dentistry up to date with new approaches, exploring a wide range of the latest developments through an accessible expert commentary. Original papers and relevant publications are condensed into digestible summaries, drawing attention to the current methods and findings. We are a central resource for the most cutting edge and relevant issues concerning the evidence-based approach in dentistry today. Evidence-Based Dentistry is published by Springer Nature on behalf of the British Dental Association.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信