Ozonized gels vs chlorhexidine in non-surgical periodontal treatment: A randomized clinical trial

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of newly introduced ozonated gels compared with conventional chlorhexidine gel in the home management of periodontal patients. Materials and Methods: 30 patients with bilateral periodontal disease (severity I, complexity II) were enrolled (split-mouth study design). After nonsurgical mechanical periodontal debridement, the teeth were randomly divided into two groups: teeth in the Control group were treated with a chlorhexidine-based gel to aid oral hygiene maneuvers for 2 weeks after the first visit, while teeth in the Test group were treated in the same way with ozone-based gels. After the baseline assessment, the follow-up included assessments at 1, 2, and 6 months. The variables evaluated were clinical attachment loss (CAL), probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BoP), plaque control record (PCR), recession (R), and tooth mobility (TM). Results: For CAL, PPD, BoP, and PCR, significant intragroup differences were found for both groups (p < 0.05), in contrast to intergroup differences (p > 0.05). No significant differences were found for R and TM. Conclusion: Nonsurgical mechanical periodontal debridement with adjunctive use of ozone and chlorhexidine was found to be effective in periodontal treatment. Ozone could be suggested as an alternative to chlorhexidine.