Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31897708›Full record

Trial reportClinical oral investigations2020

Evaluation of efficacy of non-thermal atmospheric pressure plasma in treatment of periodontitis: a randomized controlled clinical trial.

Diğdem Küçük, Levent Savran, Utku Kürşat Ercan, Ziyşan Buse Yarali, Ozan Karaman, Alpdoğan Kantarci, Mehmet Sağlam, Serhat Köseoğlu

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Penetration depth of cold atmospheric plasma into biological tissue: a review.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Diğdem KüçükFaculty of Dentistry, Department of Periodontology, Katip Celebi University, Izmir, Turkey.
Levent SavranFaculty of Dentistry, Department of Periodontology, Katip Celebi University, Izmir, Turkey.
Utku Kürşat ErcanFaculty of Engineering and Architecture, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Katip Celebi University, Izmir, Turkey.
Ziyşan Buse YaraliDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine Laboratory, Katip Celebi University, Izmir, Turkey.
Ozan KaramanFaculty of Engineering and Architecture, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Katip Celebi University, Izmir, Turkey.
Alpdoğan KantarciThe Forsyth Institute, Department of Applied Oral Sciences, Center for Periodontology, Cambridge, USA.
Mehmet SağlamFaculty of Dentistry, Department of Periodontology, Katip Celebi University, Izmir, Turkey.
Serhat KöseoğluFaculty of Dentistry, Department of Periodontology, Katip Celebi University, Izmir, Turkey. serhatkoseoglu@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4121-2494

Funding

Türkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştirma Kurumu 315S274
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIn this clinical study, we aim to evaluate the effectiveness of non-thermal atmospheric pressure plasma (NAPP), which is a novel procedure used in periodontal pocket decontamination adjunctive to non-surgical periodontal treatment (NSPT).

methodsThe study included 25 systemically healthy periodontitis patients. In the split-mouth design, NAPP application into the pockets, in addition to NSPT, was performed. Clinical periodontal data, gingival crevicular fluid, and subgingival plaque samples of patients were taken before and during the first and third months of treatment. Biochemical assays were conducted using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Analysis of bacteria was performed with polymerase chain reaction method.

resultsThere was more clinical attachment level (CAL) gain in the 3rd month in the test group (deep pockets: 3.90 mm, pockets ≥ 5 mm: 2.72 mm) compared to the control group (deep pockets: 3.40 mm, pockets ≥ 5 mm: 2.58 mm) (p < 0.05), but no significant difference between groups in CAL. Clinical periodontal parameters improved in both study groups (p < 0.05). However, the gingival index (GI) and the bleeding on probing (BOP) rate decreased more in the test group (GI: 0.55, BOP: 9.48%, and GI: 0.38, BOP: 8.46% in the 1st and 3rd months, respectively) compared to the control group (GI: 0.68, BOP: 13.43%, and GI: 0.52, BOP: 14.58%) (p < 0.05). In addition, there was no significant difference in probing depth and biochemical markers between groups (p > 0.05). It was observed that NAPP reduced the number of bacteria more than the control group in the 1st and 3rd months.

conclusionsIt was seen that the single-time NAPP application concurrent with NSPT provided additional CAL gain, elimination of putative periodontopathogens and reduced their recolonization. Longitudinal studies with larger population and longer time are required. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: NSPT is an effective method for the treatment of periodontitis but bacteria recolonization that causes recurrence of the periodontal disease occurs within a short period. NAPP can reduce the recurrence of periodontal disease by providing better bacterial elimination and should, therefore, be used in maintenance of periodontitis.

Indexed as

Chronic PeriodontitisPeriodontitisPlasma GasesDental Plaque IndexDental ScalingFollow-Up StudiesHumansPeriodontal Attachment LossRoot PlaningPlasma GasesCold plasmaNon-thermal atmospheric pressure plasmaPeriodontal debridementPeriodontitisRoot planing

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.