File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Effectiveness of Endoscope‐Assisted Subgingival Debridement Versus Repeated Root Surface Debridement or Access Flap Periodontal Surgery in Step 3 Periodontal Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

TitleEffectiveness of Endoscope‐Assisted Subgingival Debridement Versus Repeated Root Surface Debridement or Access Flap Periodontal Surgery in Step 3 Periodontal Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
Authors
Keywordsendoscopes
meta-analysis
periodontal debridement
periodontitis
systematic review
Issue Date31-Jul-2025
PublisherJohn Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Citation
Clinical and Experimental Dental Research, 2025, v. 11, n. 4 How to Cite?
Abstract

Objectives

Periodontitis is a multifactorial inflammatory disease leading to the progressive destruction of the tooth-supporting apparatus. The management of residual periodontal pockets remains a challenge for Step 3 periodontal therapy. This systematic review aims to evaluate the potential and efficacy of the periodontal endoscope in managing residual periodontal pockets during Step 3 periodontal therapy.

Material and Methods

A comprehensive search was conducted in Medline, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases up to December 2024. Studies included were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing periodontal endoscope-assisted subgingival debridement (EASD) with repeated root surface debridement (RSD) and access flap periodontal surgery (AFPS). Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were performed independently by two reviewers.

Results

Five RCTs were included, involving 155 subjects and 4072 sites. EASD showed a significantly higher periodontal probing depth (PPD) reduction compared to repeated RSD, with a weighted mean difference (WMD) of 0.5 mm (95% CI: 0.19–0.81) at 3-month postoperation. At 6-month postoperation, the WMD of PPD and clinical attachment level (CAL) changes were 0.84 mm (95% CI: 0.60–1.09) and 0.89 mm (95% CI: 0.45–1.34), respectively, in favor of EASD. EASD showed a significantly higher prevalence ratio (20%) of pocket resolution (PPD ≤ 4 mm) compared to repeated RSD at 6-month postoperation. No significant differences were observed between EASD and AFPS in the changes of CAL, PPD and prevalence of pocket resolution (PPD ≤ 4 mm). The overall certainty of the evidence was deemed to be “low” for EASD versus repeated RSD comparisons and “moderate” for EASD versus AFPS comparisons.

Conclusions

EASD demonstrated superior clinical outcomes compared to repeated RSD in managing residual periodontal pockets. Further high-quality research is necessary to validate these findings and explore the long-term benefits of EASD.


Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/358939
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 1.7
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.541

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHo, King Lun Dominic-
dc.contributor.authorFok, Melissa Rachel-
dc.contributor.authorLi, Kar Yan-
dc.contributor.authorPelekos, Georgios-
dc.contributor.authorLeung, Wai Keung-
dc.date.accessioned2025-08-13T07:48:56Z-
dc.date.available2025-08-13T07:48:56Z-
dc.date.issued2025-07-31-
dc.identifier.citationClinical and Experimental Dental Research, 2025, v. 11, n. 4-
dc.identifier.issn2057-4347-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/358939-
dc.description.abstract<h3>Objectives</h3><p>Periodontitis is a multifactorial inflammatory disease leading to the progressive destruction of the tooth-supporting apparatus. The management of residual periodontal pockets remains a challenge for Step 3 periodontal therapy. This systematic review aims to evaluate the potential and efficacy of the periodontal endoscope in managing residual periodontal pockets during Step 3 periodontal therapy.</p><h3>Material and Methods</h3><p>A comprehensive search was conducted in Medline, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases up to December 2024. Studies included were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing periodontal endoscope-assisted subgingival debridement (EASD) with repeated root surface debridement (RSD) and access flap periodontal surgery (AFPS). Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were performed independently by two reviewers.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>Five RCTs were included, involving 155 subjects and 4072 sites. EASD showed a significantly higher periodontal probing depth (PPD) reduction compared to repeated RSD, with a weighted mean difference (WMD) of 0.5 mm (95% CI: 0.19–0.81) at 3-month postoperation. At 6-month postoperation, the WMD of PPD and clinical attachment level (CAL) changes were 0.84 mm (95% CI: 0.60–1.09) and 0.89 mm (95% CI: 0.45–1.34), respectively, in favor of EASD. EASD showed a significantly higher prevalence ratio (20%) of pocket resolution (PPD ≤ 4 mm) compared to repeated RSD at 6-month postoperation. No significant differences were observed between EASD and AFPS in the changes of CAL, PPD and prevalence of pocket resolution (PPD ≤ 4 mm). The overall certainty of the evidence was deemed to be “low” for EASD versus repeated RSD comparisons and “moderate” for EASD versus AFPS comparisons.</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>EASD demonstrated superior clinical outcomes compared to repeated RSD in managing residual periodontal pockets. Further high-quality research is necessary to validate these findings and explore the long-term benefits of EASD.</p>-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherJohn Wiley & Sons Ltd.-
dc.relation.ispartofClinical and Experimental Dental Research-
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.-
dc.subjectendoscopes-
dc.subjectmeta-analysis-
dc.subjectperiodontal debridement-
dc.subjectperiodontitis-
dc.subjectsystematic review-
dc.titleEffectiveness of Endoscope‐Assisted Subgingival Debridement Versus Repeated Root Surface Debridement or Access Flap Periodontal Surgery in Step 3 Periodontal Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturepublished_or_final_version-
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/cre2.70196-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-105012142233-
dc.identifier.volume11-
dc.identifier.issue4-
dc.identifier.eissn2057-4347-
dc.identifier.issnl2057-4347-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats