A systematic review of the effect of surgical debridement vs non-surgical debridement for the treatment of XXXX .

@entity6730 @entity32 @entity7278 @entity1017 @entity5951 @entity922
OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the evidence of effectiveness of surgical vs. non-surgical therapy for the treatment of @entity7278 . METHODS: A search was conducted for randomized controlled trials of at least 12 months duration comparing surgical with non-surgical treatment of @entity7278 . Data sources included the National Library of Medicine computerised bibliographic database MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Oral Health Group (COHG) Specialist Trials Register. Screening, data abstraction and quality assessment were conducted independently by multiple reviewers (L.H., F.H., L.T.). The primary outcome measures evaluated were gain in clinical attachment level (CAL) and reduction in @entity5951 ( @entity5951 ). RESULTS: The search provided 589 abstracts of which six randomized controlled trials were included. Meta-analysis evaluation of these studies indicated that 12 months following treatment, surgical therapy resulted in 0.6 mm more @entity5951 reduction (WMD 0.58 mm; 95% CI 0.38, 0.79) and 0.2 mm more @entity922 (WMD 0.19 mm; 95% CI 0.04, 0.35) than non-surgical therapy in deep pockets (>6 mm). In 4-6 mm pockets scaling and root planing resulted in 0.4 mm more @entity1017 (WMD -0.37 mm; 95% CI -0.49, -0.26) and 0.4 mm less probing depth reduction (WMD 0.35 mm; 95% CI 0.23, 0.47) than surgical therapy. In shallow pockets (1-3 mm) non-surgical therapy resulted in 0.5 mm less @entity6730 (WMD -0.51 mm; 95% CI -0.74, -0.29) than surgical therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Both scaling and root planing alone and scaling and root planing combined with flap procedure are effective methods for the treatment of @entity7278 in terms of attachment level gain and reduction in @entity32 . In the treatment of deep pockets open flap debridement results in greater @entity922 .
