Objective To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of Periocline (2% minocycline hydrochloride ointment) versus Yakang (metronidazole stilus) for treating chronic periodontitis in adults by means of meta-analysis. Methods The following electronic databases as PubMed, The Cochrane Library, EMbase, CNKI, CBM and WanFang Data were searched on computer from inception to July, 2012, and the references of all selected studies were also retrieved to collect the relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on periocline vs. Yakang for chronic periodontitis. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and evaluated the methodological quality of the included RCTs. Then meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.0 software. Results A total of 7 RCTs involving 737 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that there were no significant differences in probing depth (MD=0.26, 95%CI −0.35 to 0.87, P=0.40), clinical attachment level (MD=−0.10, 95%CI −0.75 to 0.54, P=0.75), sulcus bleeding index (MD=0.12, 95%CI −0.30 to 0.53, P=0.59), and plaque index (MD=0.07, 95%CI −0.09 to 0.22, P=0.41) between the Periocline group and the Yakang group. Conclusion The current evidence shows that based on periodental non-surgical treatment, Periocline is similar to Yakang in improving the symptoms of chronic periodontitis in adults. However, given the low methodological quality and the limited sample size of most included studies, this conclusion still needs to be further proved by conducting more strictly-designed, high-quality and large-scale RCTs. The long-term effectiveness of those 2 treatment modalities also needs to be observed in a longer follow-up duration.
Objective To systematically evaluate the clinical effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) combined with grafting material for the treatment of periodontal intrabony defects. Methods The following databases such as PubMed, The Cochrane Library, EMbase, CNKI, CBM and WanFang Data were searched on computer from inception to August, 2012 to collect the relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on PRP combined with grafting material versus grafting material alone for periodontal intrabony defects. Two reviewers independently screened the literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted the data, and assessed the methodological quality of the included studies. RevMan 5.2 software was applied for meta-analysis. Results A total of 11 RCTs involving 342 patients were included. The pooled analysis on 7 RCTs showed that there was a significant difference in lower increase of clinical attachment loss (WMD=0.70, 95%CI 0.51 to 0.90, Plt;0.000 01) between the PRP combined with grafting material group and the grafting material alone group. But there was no significant difference in the gingival recession (WMD= −0.01, 95%CI −0.15 to 0.13, P=0.86). The pooled analysis on 9 RCTs showed that there was no significant difference in the reduction of plaque index (WMD= −0.04, 95%CI −0.09 to 0.02, P=0.20) between the two groups. Conclusion PRP combined with grafting material is superior to grafting material alone in the clinical attachment loss. But, there are no significant differences in gingival recession and plaque index. However, given the limited sample size and incomplete measure indexes of included studies, this conclusion still needs to be further proved by conducting more high-quality and large-scale RCTs.