USE OF TOPICAL DESSICANT AGENT (HYBENX®) AS AN ADJUNCT TO
ULTRASONIC DEBRIDEMENT IN THE INITIAL TREATMENT OF
A CLINICAL AND MICROBIOLOGICAL PILOT STUDY IN HUMANS.
Lombardo G., Signoretto C., Pardo A., *Flor C., Gelio V., Lubich S., Faccincani M.
The aim of the study was to clinically and microbiologically evaluate if the ultrasonic debridement efficacy can
be enhanced by the adjunctive topical administration of a liquid with hygroscopic properties (HYBENX® Oral
Fig. 3 e 4: Comparison between the aerobic and anaerobic total
bacterial loads reductions (log10) assessed after the mere HBX
subgingival administration in the test group (A) and after the UD
administration in the control group (B)
T1a: First treatment session, at baseline, before treatments
T1b: First treatment session, immediately after HBX administration
and before UD, in the test group
T1c: First treatment session, immediately after UD administration in
the control group
Anaerobic bacterial load (UFC/ml)
The short term results of this 3-month study demonstrated
that greater inflammatory signs and anaerobic bacterial load
reductions may be provided from the topical association of a
desiccant liquid (HybenX®) to the ultrasonic instrumentation.
Under the limitations of this study design, no statistical
differences were demonstrated on PPD, CAL and GM.
16 patients completed this 3-month study.
Compared with the control group the test group presented
both at T2 and at T3 significantly greater reductions in
Visible Plaque Index (VPI), Bleeding on Probing scores (BoP)
(Fig. 1 e 2). No significant changes of PPD, GM and CAL
between groups have been provided (Data not shown).
As monotherapy, HBX reached the same bacterial load
reduction as UD alone (Fig. 3 e 4).
Compared to UD, HBX associated to UD, resulted immediately
after treatment in a statistically significant greater bacterial
load reductions, and the difference was still present after 6
weeks in the anaerobic bacterial load. At 3 months, after the
both groups presented significant
differences in anaerobic bacterial load compared with the
baseline (Fig. 5)
Fig. 1 e 2: Percentage of sites presenting plaque accumulation(VPII)
and presenting bleeding after probing (BoP) at the various
examination intervals: statistically significant difference between
MATERIALS AND METHOD
Twenty patients presenting moderate to severe chronic
periodontitis were enrolled in a randomized 3-month, splitmouth, single-blind, prospective study. At baseline control
and test sides were treated with supra and subgingival
ultrasonic debridement (UD) in adjunction, for the test
group, of a locally delivered desiccant liquid (HYBENX®).
Treatments were repeated after 6 weeks.
Clinical (VPI, BoP, GI, PPD, CAL, GM) and microbiological
anaerobic (ANAER) and aerobic (AER) bacterial loads were
assessed at baseline before treatment.
Samples were collected in the same session in test group
immediately after the topical administration (T1b) to assess
whether the topical agent had some effectiveness if
administered alone, and then samples were repeated in both
group after UD treatment (T1c).
Microbiological sampling and Clinical measurements were
repeated after 6 weeks (T2) and after 3 months (T3).
Fig. 5: Aerobic and anaerobic total bacterial loads (log10) in subgingival
biofilm at different time intervals for control and test groups.
T1a: First treatment session, at baseline, before treatments;
T1c: First treatment session, immediately after UD administration;
T2: Second treatment session, after 6 weeks from baseline, (ie 6 weeks
from the first treatment );T3: Third treatment session, after 3 months
from baseline, (ie 6 weeks from the repeated treatment)
UD-HBX: UD-HBX treated sites
UD: UD treated sites
E-mail: [email protected]