Trial reportHead & face medicine2026
Comparisons between ultrasonic subgingival debridement with or without manual root planing on clinical parameters improving of periodontitis: a split-mouth randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in Head & face medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo evaluate the adjunctive clinical efficacy of manual root planing following ultrasonic subgingival debridement (SD) in the treatment of generalized severe periodontitis. MATERIAL AND
methodsTwenty-nine patients diagnosed with Stage III or IV periodontitis were enrolled in this single-blind, split-mouth, randomized controlled trial (RCT). Quadrants were randomly assigned to receive either ultrasonic subgingival debridement alone (SD group) or ultrasonic subgingival debridement followed by manual root planing (SRP group). Clinical parameters, including Probing Pocket Depth (PPD), Clinical Attachment Level (CAL), and Bleeding Index (BI), were recorded at baseline, 3, and 6 months.
resultsTwenty-nine patients completed the study. Both treatment modalities yielded statistically significant improvements in all clinical parameters compared with baseline (p < 0.05). The SRP group resulted in superior outcomes compared with ultrasonic subgingival debridement alone. Analysis revealed a significantly greater PPD reduction in the SRP group at 3 months (adjusted MD: 0.20 mm; 95% CI [0.13, 0.27]; p < 0.01), and this advantage was sustained at 6 months (adjusted MD: 0.11 mm; 95% CI [0.05, 0.18]; p < 0.01). SRP achieved superior CAL gain at 3 months (adjusted MD: 0.10 mm; 95% CI [0.01, 0.19]; p < 0.05). Crucially, regarding clinical endpoints, the SRP group exhibited a significantly lower prevalence of residual deep pockets (PPD ≥ 5 mm) at 3 months and 6 months compared with the SD group (p < 0.05), indicating a higher rate of pocket closure. Both treatment modalities achieved significant reductions in Bleeding Index (BI) scores compared to baseline (p < 0.05), with no statistically significant inter-group differences observed at any time point.
conclusionsWhile ultrasonic debridement alone is effective, the adjunctive use of manual root planing yields statistically significant, though modest, additional benefit in PPD reduction and CAL gain in generalized severe periodontitis. While it effectively reduces the burden of residual pockets in the short term, its long-term advantage is attenuated, highlighting the necessity of strict supportive periodontal therapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.