<%BANNER%>

Clinical Evaluation of Biofilm Content in Orthodontic Patients Treated with ProphyJet versus Conventional Home Care


PAGE 1

1 CLINICAL EVALUATION OF BIOFILM CONTENT IN ORTHODONTIC PATIENTS TR EATED WITH PROPHY-JETTM VERSUS CONVENTIONAL HOME CARE By MICHAEL A. SUTTON A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2007

PAGE 2

2 Michael A. Sutton

PAGE 3

3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my mother and father for their never ending support.

PAGE 4

4 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...............................................................................................................3 LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................. ..........5 LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................................ .........6 ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................... ..............7 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................... .9 2 METERIALS AND METHODS............................................................................................11 3 STATISTICAL METHOD.....................................................................................................14 4 RESULTS........................................................................................................................ .......15 5 DISCUSSION..................................................................................................................... ....19 6 CONCLUSION..................................................................................................................... ..24 LIST OF REFERENCES............................................................................................................. ..25 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.........................................................................................................27

PAGE 5

5 LIST OF TABLES Table page 2-1 Bacteria analysed by DNA-DNA hybridization................................................................13 4-1 Number of days between appointments for each patient...................................................16

PAGE 6

6 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 4-1 Plaque Index Scores (mean SE, n = 16). MX PJ = Maxillary Prophy-Jet, MX TB = Maxillary Toothbrush, MD PJ = Mandibul ar Prophy-Jet, MD TB = Mandibular Toothbrush..................................................................................................................... ....17 4-2 Decalcification Index Scores (mean SE, n = 16). MX PJ = Maxillary Prophy-Jet, MX TB = Maxillary Toothbrush, MD PJ = Mandibular Prophy-Jet, MD TB = Mandibular Toothbrush.....................................................................................................17 4-3 Papillary Bleeding Score (mean SE, n = 16). MX PJ = Maxillary Prophy-Jet, MX TB = Maxillary Toothbrush, MD PJ = Ma ndibular Prophy-Jet, MD TB = Mandibular Toothbrush..................................................................................................................... ....18

PAGE 7

7 Abstract of Thesis Presen ted to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science CLINICAL EVALUATION OF BIOFILM CONTENT IN ORTHODONTIC PATIENTS TR EATED WITH PROPHY-JETTM VERSUS CONVENTIONAL HOME CARE By Michael A. Sutton May 2007 Chair: Timothy T. Wheeler Major: Dental Sciences Orthodontic appliances can accumulate plaque, leading to gingivitis, enamel decalcification, and dental decay. Currently, plaque removal in the orthodontic office is limited to tooth-brushing after wire rem oval. A prospective randomized cl inical trial was conducted to compare the Prophy-Jet to manual tooth-brushi ng for removing dental plaque and effecting bacterial content of plaque. Our study included 24 orthodontic patients with fixed appliances showing poor oral hygiene were recruited to participate in the st udy for 7 consecutive orthodontic appointments (T0-T6). The study group consisted of 17 males and 7 females with an average age of 14.1 years (range 10 to 17). Subjects were randomly assigned to two groups. The first group had their teeth cleaned each visit with the Prophy-Jet by a dent al professional; the second group brushed their own teeth with a manual tooth brush at each visit. Plaque Index (PI), Papillary Bleeding Score (PBS), and Decalcification Index (DI) were asse ssed throughout the study. In addition to the indices, plaque samples were taken for an alysis of the bacterial content by DNA-DNA hybridization.

PAGE 8

8 There was a significantly lower mean cha nge in PI score for the prophy-jet group compared to the toothbrush group comparing baselin e to time point 6 (prophy-jet mean change 0.42, toothbrush mean change 0.20, positive change indicates improvement). The bacteria species present in the plaque samples remained fairly constant. The samples tested positive for the same bacteria at different time points and different patients. The Prophy-Jet had no effect on plaque content. Cleanings with the Prophy-Je t at each orthodontic visit were not effective in changing the PI, DI, PBS or bacterial conten t of orthodontic patients with poor oral hygiene when compared to conventional tooth brushing.

PAGE 9

9 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Dental biofilm has long been associated with tooth decay and periodontal disease. Fixed orthodontic appliances, specifically brackets bond ed to teeth, can accumulate plaque, and may interfere with effective plaque removal. Pr oper oral hygiene by patie nts undergoing orthodontic treatment, is usually difficult to maintain. Accumu lated dental plaque in orthodontic patients has been associated with enamel decalcification, en amel scarring, dental decay, and gingivitis. Highly aciduric bacteria such as Streptococcus mutans and lactobacilli have been reported following the placement of orthodontic appliances.1 These microorganisms produce acid as a metabolic byproduct lowering the intraoral pH, and in creasing the risk of decalcification or white spot formation.2 In a study of decalcification incidence, 50% of orthodontic patients experienced an increase in decalcification during treatment, with the highest incidence in the maxillary incisor region and lowest incidence in the maxillary posterior region.3 In addition to decalcification, several studies have also shown strong correlations between the microbial composition of subgingival biofilms and periodontal disease, most notably species such as P. gingivalis and A. actinomycetemcomitans. Aa has been associated with aggressive periodontitis.4 Although methodologies for characterizing th e microbial flora in a dental biofilm vary greatly, the importance of elucidating the bacterial species that may be responsible for causing a wide range of oral health problems, ra nging from periodontal disease to dental caries, cannot be exaggerated; especially considering recent research im plicating periodon tal disease as a risk factor for cardiovascul ar complications, low term bi rth weight, and diabetes. Since its introduction in 1977, air-powder polis hing systems have been effective at removing stain and plaque.5 The design of the various air-powder polishing systems, such as Dentsplys Prophy-Jet, use a mixture of air, water, and sodium bicarbonate to deliver a

PAGE 10

10 controlled stream of sodium bicarbonate particle s to the tooth surface. Advantages of air polishers include rapid removal of t ooth deposits, less invoked hypersensitivity;6,7 less operator fatigue;8 and improved access to pits and fissures.9 Currently, plaque removal in the orthodontic office is selectively limited to tooth-brushing afte r wire removal. This method of plaque removal requiring wire removal relies on the patients abi lity to effectively remo ve the plaque with a manual tooth-brush. The Prophy-Jet has been shown to be effective in general dental patients during supportive periodontal ther apy, and to decrease decalcif ication in orthodontic patients.10 Its effect on the microorganisms with in plaque has not been studied. The aims of this clinical trial were to evaluate the long-term effects of monthly debridements with the Prophy-Jet in orthodontic patients with poor oral hygiene on gingivitis, decalcification, and plaque accumulation; to eval uate the effect on biofilm content with the Prophy-Jet in orthodontic patients with poor or al hygiene using the DNA-DNA hybridization technique; to compare the effectiveness of th e Prophy-Jet to currentl y used method of manual tooth-brushing.

PAGE 11

11 CHAPTER 2 METERIALS AND METHODS The study was designed as a prospective randomi zed controlled clinical trial. Patients undergoing orthodontic treatment with brackets and wires in the maxillary and mandibular arches between the ages of 10 and 18 were recru ited from the Graduate Or thodontic Clinic at the University of Florida, College of Dentistry. Other selection criteria for inclusion in the trial were the presence of extensive am ounts of visually detectable plaque around the orthodontic appliances as identified by the operator, good health with no current medications, and willingness to sign informed consent. Participan ts agreed to continue their normal daily home care routine, and refrain from professional cleanings during the study. The Institutional Review Board for research at the Univer sity of Florida approved the prot ocol prior to starting the study. The subjects were randomly assigned to two groups by a computer-generated sequence. The first group had their teeth cleaned with the Prophy-Jet by a dental professional; the second group brushed their own teeth with a manual tooth br ush at each visit. For participation in the trial, subjects were financially compensated a nd received a full mouth debridement with the Prophy-Jet at completion of the study. The protocol for each clinical visit was de signed based on a previous study that was conducted in 2003 at the Un iversity of Florida.10 Participants were seen for a total of seven clinical visits, the first consisting of a baseline examination of dental health parameters including the collection of clinical indices, and an initial pl aque sample. At this initial visit, a Prophy-Jet cleaning was completed by a dent al professional or a manual t ooth-brushing by the subject. Also, a plaque sample was taken from each subj ect. The right maxillary and mandubular lateral incisors and first premolars were sampled by carefully moving an explorer between the orthodontic bracket and gingival margi n. Samples were stored at -80 C in 1ml of TE buffer

PAGE 12

12 solution for DNA-DNA hybridization analysis at the completion of the study. Subjects were then seen at regular orthodontic appointments for 7 visits, at which times clinical indices were recorded and plaque samples collected. The labial surfaces of teeth bonded with brackets from the 2nd premolars forward were included in this assessment. The following clinic al indices were measured for this study. Plaque levels were assessed from 0 to 5 using the Turesky modification of the QuigleyHein Plaque Index (PI).11 The PI was recorded at each visit before the Prophy-Jet or toothbrush cleanings were completed. Decalcifications were assessed visually and ta ctilely with a dental explorer and scored from 0 to 4 by using a modified version of th e white spot lesion index of Gorelick et al.3 The decalcification index (DI) was measured at baseline, time point 3, and time point 6. Decalcification assessment was recorded after rem oval of plaque to allow complete unobstructed visualization of the enamel. Gingivitis was assessed at each visit with a sc ore of 1 to 5 using the Papillary Bleeding Score (PBS) of Loesche.12 A Stimu-dent was used to stimul ate the interdental papilla, which is a common site of gingival inflammation fo r orthodontic patients. Subsequent gingival bleeding was used as a meas ure of gingival health. A single operator performed all measurements and cleanings. Before recruitment of subjects for the Prophy-Jet study, the operator wa s calibrated by a calibra ted by a standardized examiner on the three clinical indices (DI, PI and PBS). Use of the Prophy-Jet was also calibrated to ensure consistency. Five orthodontic patients meeti ng the inclusion criteria of the planned study were examined by operator and hygienist and standardization and reproducibility of indices were demonstrated. These patients were not included in the clinical trial.

PAGE 13

13 Twenty-four orthodontic patient s with fixed appliances showing poor oral hygiene were recruited to participate in th e study. The study group consisted of 17 males and 7 females with an average age of 14.1 years (range 10 to 17). Ov er the course of the study, 8 patients were eliminated for missing appointments or discontinui ng orthodontic treatment, leaving a total of 16 patients to complete the study. Collected plaque samples were stored in 1ml of TE buffer (10 mM Tris-HCL, 1mM EDTA, pH 7.6) at -80 C and analyzed for bacteria content using checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridization. The process orig inally described by Socransky and Wall-Manning was followed for the analysis.13,14,15 However, the BrightStar syst em (Ambion, Inc., Austin TX) was substituted for the digoxigenin-labeling system. Ta ble 2-1 shows a list of bacterial strains used for probes in the analysis. Table 2-1. Bacteria analys ed by DNA-DNA hybridization Streptococcus gordonii* Actinomyces isralii Streptococcus mutans Actinomyces naeslundii* Streptococcus oralis* Actinomyces odontolyticus* Streptococcus salvarius Actinomyces viscosus Prevatella intermedia* Porphyromonas gingivalis* Prevatella oralis* Lactobacillus casei Fusabacterium nucleatum* Lactobacillus rhamosus Veillonella parvula* Ta nnerella forsythensis* Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans* Bacteria present in the plaque samples

PAGE 14

14 CHAPTER 3 STATISTICAL METHOD Changes in mean scores that occurred during treatment for PI, DI, and PBS were evaluated with the 2-sample t-test, as well as the Wilc ox rank sum test. The presence or absence of bacteria in the plaque samples were not statically evaluated.

PAGE 15

15 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS Twenty-four orthodontic patient s with fixed appliances showing poor oral hygiene were recruited to participate in a study comparing the Prophy-Jet to manual tooth brushing. The study group consisted of 17 males and 7 females w ith an average age of 14.1 years (range 10 to 17). Over the course of the study, 8 patients were eliminated for missing appointments or discontinuing orthodontic treatment, leaving a total of 16 patients to complete the study. The 16 subjects consisted of 11 males, 5 females, 8 in the Prophy-Jet group and 8 in the toothbrush group. At baseline (T0) there were no statistical differen ces between the two groups for PI, DI, or PBS. The low number of subjects (16) did no t provide adequate power to detect clinically significant differences. The change in mean PI scores in the maxillary arch between the Prophy-Jet and toothbrush groups was statistically significant co mparing baseline to time point 6 (prophy-jet mean change -0.42, toothbrush mean change 0.20, positive change indicates improvement). The Prophy-Jet subjects demonstrated a greater PI score with significance levels of p=0.05 at T6. No statistical significance for PI score was found in the mandibular arch (Figure 4-1). A comparison of the cleaning effectiveness betw een the Prophy-Jet and manual tooth-brushing for each visit is illustrated in Figure 4-1. The change between baseline and time point 6 in mean decalcification scores (Figure 4-2) between the Prophy-Jet and toothbrush was bo rderline statistically significant (p=0.06) (prophy-jet mean change -0.11, toothbrush mean change -0.01, negative change indicates worsening) in the maxillary arch only. Thus the prophy-jet group had a greater increase in decalcification score with a si gnificance level of p = 0.06 at T6. No statistical significance for decalcification score was found in th e mandibular arch (Figure 4-2)

PAGE 16

16 Although there was a trend of d ecreasing papillary bleeding sc ores over time, these were not statistical significance for in either arch (Figure 4-3). Results of the DNA-DNA hybridization showed l ittle to no change be tween patients in the two groups or between time points. The plaque samples consistently tested positive for the bacteria highlighted in Table 2-1. Intensity of staining was scor ed on a scale of 0-3 and equated to approximately 105 to 107 cells. Bacteria present, decalcification presence, total treatment time and treatment group data were cross referenced and examined for any correlations. Time intervals between subject visits are presented in Table 4-1. Inspection of these data showed no relationship between the amount of time, presen ce or absence of decalcification, presence or absence of certain bacteria and treatment group. Table 4-1. Number of days between appointments for each patient Patient No. T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 Total 1 0353842332245 215 3 0492824324357 233 4 0214184337089 338 5 0452856515967 306 6 0342633442134 192 7 0273734552633 212 8 0642743403427 235 9 0273734285449 229 10 0453434573441 245 12 0273727494254 236 14 0373428353431 199 19 0412842272927 194 21 0351433283428 172 22 0283340194830 198 23 0424334554240 256 24 0424334554240 256

PAGE 17

17 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5T0T1T2T3T4T5T6Time PointMean Plaque Scor e MX PJ MX TB MD PJ MD TB Figure 4-1. Plaque Index Scores (mean SE, n = 16). MX PJ = Maxillary Prophy-Jet, MX TB = Maxillary Toothbrush, MD PJ = Mandibul ar Prophy-Jet, MD TB = Mandibular Toothbrush 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5T0T3T6Time PointMean Decalcification Scor e MX PJ MX TB MD PJ MD TB Figure 4-2. Decalcification Index Scores (mean SE, n = 16). MX PJ = Maxillary Prophy-Jet, MX TB = Maxillary Toothbrush, MD PJ = Mandibular Prophy-Jet, MD TB = Mandibular Toothbrush

PAGE 18

18 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 T0T1T2T3T4T5T6 Time PointPapillary Bleeding Scor e MX PJ MX TB MD PJ MD TB Figure 4-3. Papillary Bleeding Score (mean SE, n = 16). MX PJ = Maxillary Prophy-Jet, MX TB = Maxillary Toothbrush, MD PJ = Ma ndibular Prophy-Jet, MD TB = Mandibular Toothbrush

PAGE 19

19 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION The present study was conducted as a prospec tive randomized controlle d clinical trial on 16 orthodontic patients with full fi xed appliances demonstrating vi sible supragingival plaque. By selecting patients in orthodont ic treatment with poor oral hygi ene, this study attempted to determine whether regular Prophy-Jet cleanings would minimize the harmful effects of plaque thereby reducing any negative effects. A study by Barnes and Gerbo et al.16 investigated the applica tion the Prophy-Jet device in an orthodontic setting. The study showed that the Prophy-Jet was more effective in removing plaque around orthodontic appliances; and required less time than traditional rubber cup/pumice prophylaxis. In the present study, the outcomes of plaque debridement at regular orthodontic visits showed no difference between the Prophy-Jet a nd toothbrush groups for PI, although at time point 6, the toothbrush group had stat istically significant lower plaque scores (Figure 1). PI scores were taken at the beginni ng of each appointment after the patient rinsed with disclosing solution. It can be speculated th at the amount of pla que accumulation was cl osely related to the time interval since the patient last brushed hi s or her teeth. Patients seen during morning appointments seemed to have much less pla que accumulated as compared to afternoon appointments where the patient had eaten lunch and gone all day without brushing. Therefore, PI scores could vary greatly de pending on appointment time. For future studies, plaque samples should be taken at the same time each day to prevent this confounding problem. Another possible reason for the lack of improvement by the Prophy-Jet cleanings on plaque levels, gingival inflammation, and decalci fication may be explained by biofilm formation and the study design. The salivary pellicle be gins to form within minutes to hours after

PAGE 20

20 professional dental cleaning and the initial co lonizers are gram positive bacteria such as Streptococcus and Actinomyces species.13 Over the following days, the plaque increases in thickness and quantity as gram-negative cocci an d gram-positive and gram-negative rods and filaments increase their presence. The subjects included in this study we re identified as having poor oral hygiene and while the duration of tim e between appointments apparently was enough time for plaque levels and gingivitis to return to baseline levels, it might be possible that if these time intervals were closer, a beneficial reducti on might be seen. Any potential benefits of a professional cleaning would have to be maintained by the patients in their home care in order to minimize the damaging effects of plaque accumulation on the teeth and surrounding periodontium. However, poor oral hygiene patients are the ones th at would most benefit from additional hygiene measures and might need more frequent intervention. Oral hygiene maintenance by the subject appear s to be very important in decreasing the time interval for bacteria to recolonize A 4-week study completed by Ho et al. 17 compared the Sonicare toothbrush to a manual t oothbrush. The subjects had fu ll fixed orthodontic appliances and were instructed to brush every morning a nd evening for 2 minutes. The results showed statistically lower scores for plaque index, gingival index, and sites which bled on probing for the Sonicare group. Also, there was a decrease in the amount of total gram-negative bacteria in subgingival plaque samples in the same group. Th is may indicate that mo re frequent cleaning with the Prophy-Jet and reinfo rcing home care could increase oral health of the patients. This study was patterned afte r a clinical trial completed by Albert et al. 2003, where regular cleanings with the Prophy-Jet were sh own to decrease decalcif ication in orthodontic subjects.10 Albert used a split mout h design, in which one side of the mouth was cleaned with the Prophy-Jet and the other side was cleaned by manual tooth br ushing. Possibilities for a

PAGE 21

21 decrease in the decalcification index include inte rference in the colonization of certain bacteria into the developing plaque on the tooth surface. Although there are numerous species of bacteria in plaque, most are noncariogenic.18 Primary etiologic bacteria in dental caries include Streptococcus mutans and Streptococcus sobrinus with Lactobacilli as a secondary invader involved in caries pr ogression in enamel.19 Thus, even in the presence of unaltered plaque levels and gingivitis, the monthly debridement by the Pr ophy-Jet may have altered the bacterial load by physical disruption and prevented more harm ful organisms from colonizing and promoting the decalcification process. The current study did not reach statistical significance which may have been due to the limited number of subjects. Plaque content showed little change in volum e or species present over the course of the study It was of interest that although the sample s were taken from supragingival areas (between the bracket and gingival margin) the pla que resembled mature subgingival samples.20 Instead of showing large numbers of Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus species, there were large amounts of Actinomyces odontolyticus Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans Tannerella forsythensis Veillonella parvula and Streptococcus oralis indicative of subgingival flora. This could be a product of the environment created by the bracket/tooth interface. The bracket mimics an overhanging restoration where bacteria can conlonize and mature in an anaerobic environment similar to subgingival tooth surfaces. It has been obs erved that dental restorations and fixed orthodontics increase th e amount of plaque around teeth and cause more inflammation. 29 A study comparing the subgingival microbial composition 3 months after bracket placement showed an increase in P. gingivalis P. intermedia and T. forsythia in orthodontic subjects.21 The current study displayed these bacteria in the supragingival plaque samples indicating that conditions mimicked the a subgingival environm ent. In addition, another study of microbial

PAGE 22

22 flora on metal and ceramic brackets showed the presence of A. odontolyticus and Aa.22 Both types of bacteria were present in large amounts in our study. Even though we did not observe an increase in decalcification in these subjects, it is possible with more time or an increase in subject number that these differences would be observed. The volume of bacteria could have an important role in health tissue. Cleaning has been shown to reduce the bacterial count in patients and a subsequent decreas e in both gingival index score and plaque index.23 In this study, plaque was collect ed inconsistently by scraping 4 designated teeth. One to three sw ipes with an explorer was use to collect a generous amount of plaque possible. If the gingiva was hyperplastic and encroached on the br acket, the sample could contain subgingival bacteria. Th is was common in the premolar ar ea. A possible solution to this problem would be to collect plaque by swip ing a paper point between the bracket and the gingiva. This may create a more consistent and reliable result. In addition, plaque volumes could be quantified using new di gital subtraction techniques. Another problem encountered was that th e DNA hybridization tec hnique used whole genomic DNA with which cross reactions commonly occur. For example, pure DNA was run against the probes Pg which also cross reacted wi th other bacteria species. On the other hand, Aa was present in all subjects and did not cross r eact. This means Pg may or may not have been present in the samples, but Aa was definitely pr esent in all samples. The presence of Aa is consistent with a study that reported 80% of young orthodontic patients are infected with Aa. The orthodontic patients showed more inflammation than non-orthodontic patients, but this did not necessarily correlate w ith the presence of Aa .24 Further limitations of the study include th e small sample size which may not be representative of orthodontic pa tients as a whole. The low number of subjects was well under

PAGE 23

23 the 100 subjects necessary to complete this st udy as determined by power analysis. Other potential limitations include geogr aphic sampling bias, lack of b linding due to the single operator for decalcification index, effect of extraneous factors such as manual dexterity for the patients, and selection of clinical indices.

PAGE 24

24 CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION Adequate home care is thought to be critical in maintaining oral hygiene and preventing decalcifications. For the present study, the Prophy-Jet proved to be unsuccessful in maintaining oral health or changing the biofilm c ontent in orthodontic patien ts. Further research is necessary with an adequate patient population to further study this issue.

PAGE 25

25 LIST OF REFERENCES 1 Lundstrom F, Krasse B. Strptococcus mu tans and lactobacilli frequency in orthodontic patients. European Journal of Orthodontics 1987;9:109-116 2 Mitchell L. Decalcification during ort hodontic treatment with fixed appliances-an overview. British Journal of Orthodontics 1992;19:199-205 3 Gorelick L, Geiger AM, Gwinnett AJ. Incide nce of white spot formation after banding and bonding. Am J Orthod 1982;81:93. 4 Socransky SS, Haffajee AD, Cugini MA, Sm ith C, Kent Jr. RL: Microbial complexes in subgingival plaque. J Pe riodontol 1998;25:134-144 5 Brown DM, Barnhart RC. A scientific foundation for clinical use of air polishing systems. J Pract Hyg 1995;4:36-40. 6 Atkinson DR, Cobb CM, and Killoy WJ. The e ffect of an air-powder abrasive system on in vitro root surfaces. J Periodontol 1984;55:13-18. 7 Galloway SE, Pashley DH. Rate of removal of root structure by the use of the Prophy-jet device. J Periodontol 1987;7:464-469. 8 Weaks LM, Clinical evaluation of the Prophy-Jet as an instrument for routine removal of tooth stain and plaque. J Periodontol 1984;55(8):486-8 9 Strand GV, Randal M. Efficiency of cleani ng fissures with an air-polishing instrument. Acm Odontol Scand 1988;46:113-117. 10 Albert et al. Clincal ev aluation of the Prophy-Jet in R outine Plaque Debridement of Orthodontic patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007, in press 11 Quigley GA, Hein JW. Comparative clean ing efficiency of manual and power brushing. J Am Dent Assoc 1962;65:26. 12 Loesche W J Clinical and microbiological aspects of chemotherapeutic agents used according to the specific plaque hypothesis. J Dent Res 1979;58:2402-2412. 13 Socransky SS, Haffajee AD, Smith C, Ma rtin L, Haffajee JA, Uzel NG, Goodson JM. Use of checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridizati on to study complex microbial ecosystems. Oral Microbiol Immunol 2004 Dec;19(6):352-62. 14 Socransky SS, et al. Checkerboard DNA-DNA Hybridization. Biotechniques. 1994; 17:488-492

PAGE 26

26 15 Wall-Manning GM, Sissons CH, Ande rson SA, Lee M. Checkerboard DNA-DNA Hybridization technology focused on the analys is of gram-positive cariogenic bacteria. J. Micaobiol. Meth. 2002; 51:301-311 16 Gerbo LR, Barnes CM, Leinfelder KF. Appli cations of the air-powde r polisher in clinical orthodontics. Am J Orthodont De ntofacial Orthop 1993;103:71-73. 17 Ho HP, Niederman R, Effectiveness of the Sonicare sonic toothbrush on reduction of plaque, gingivitis, probing pocket depth and subgingival bacteria in adolescent orthodontic patients. J Clin. Dent. 1997;8:15-19 18 Rosan B, Lamont R. Dental plaque formation. Microbes and Infection. 2000;1599-1607 19 Rateitschak KH, Wolf HF, Hassell TM. Colo r Atlas of Dental Medicine: Periodontology. 1989; Thieme Medical Publishers; New York, NY 20 Listgarten MA, Structure of the microbial flora associated with periodonta l health and disease in man. J Periodontol. 1976;47:1-18 21 Narajo AA, Trivino ML, Jaramillo A, Betancourth M, Botero JE. Changes in the subgingival microbiota and periodontal paramete rs before and 3 months after bracket placement. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;130:e17-275.e22 22 Anhoury P, Nathanson D, Hughes CV, So cransky S, Feres M, Chou LL. Microbial Profile on Metallic and Ceramic Bracket Materials. Angle Or thodontist. 2002;72:338-343 23 Goodson JM, et al. Microbiological change s associated with de ntal prophylaxis. JADA 2004; 135:1559-64 24 Paolantoio M, Pedrazzoli V, di Murro C, di Placido G, Picciani C, Catamo G, De Luca M, Piccolomini R. Clinical significance of Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans in young individuals during orthodontic treatment. A 3-year longitudi nal study. J Clin Periodontol. 1997;24:610-617

PAGE 27

27 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Michael Sutton was born and raised in Allent own, Pennsylvania. He received his degree of Bachelor of Science in civi l engineering and a minor in en vironmental engineering at the Pennsylvania State University in 1997. In 2004, he earned a degree of Doctor of Dental Medicine from the Temple University School of Dentistry. Upon comp letion of his dental training, he continued his education at the University of Florida, College of Dentistry, receiving a certificate in orthodontics a nd Master of Science in 2007.


Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0020964/00001

Material Information

Title: Clinical Evaluation of Biofilm Content in Orthodontic Patients Treated with ProphyJet versus Conventional Home Care
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0020964:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0020964/00001

Material Information

Title: Clinical Evaluation of Biofilm Content in Orthodontic Patients Treated with ProphyJet versus Conventional Home Care
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0020964:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text





CLINICAL EVALUATION OF BIOFILM CONTENT IN
ORTHODONTIC PATIENTS TREATED WITH PROPHY-JETT VERSUS
CONVENTIONAL HOME CARE




















By

MICHAEL A. SUTTON


A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF SCIENCE

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

2007





































02007 Michael A. Sutton









ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank my mother and father for their never ending support.












TABLE OF CONTENTS





ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............. ...............3.....


LIST OF TABLES ............_...... ...............5...


LI ST OF FIGURE S .............. ...............6.....


AB S TRAC T ......_ ................. ............_........7


CHAPTER


1 INTRODUCTION ................. ...............9.......... ......


2 METERIALS AND METHODS ................. ...............11................


3 STATISTICAL METHOD ................. ...............14........... ....


4 RE SULT S ................. ...............15.......... .....


5 DI SCUS SSION ................. ................. 19......... ....


6 CONCLU SION................ ..............2


LIST OF REFERENCES ................. ...............25........... ....


BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .............. ...............27....










LIST OF TABLES


Table page

2-1 Bacteria analysed by DNA-DNA hybridization ................ ...............13...............

4-1 Number of days between appointments for each patient ................. ................ ...._.16










LIST OF FIGURES


Figure page

4-1 Plaque Index Scores (mean & SE, n = 16). MX PJ = Maxillary Prophy-Jet, MX TB =
Maxillary Toothbrush, MD PJ = Mandibular Prophy-Jet, MD TB = Mandibular
Toothbrush ........._._. ._......_.. ...............17.....

4-2 Decalcification Index Scores (mean & SE, n = 16). MX PJ = Maxillary Prophy-Jet,
MX TB = Maxillary Toothbrush, MD PJ = Mandibular Prophy-Jet, MD TB =
M andibular Toothbrush .............. ...............17....

4-3 Papillary Bleeding Score (mean & SE, n = 16). MX PJ = Maxillary Prophy-Jet, MX
TB = Maxillary Toothbrush, MD PJ = Mandibular Prophy-Jet, MD TB = Mandibular
Toothbrush ........._... ...... ..... ...............18....









Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science

CLINICAL EVALUATION OF BIOFILM CONTENT IN
ORTHODONTIC PATIENTS TREATED WITH PROPHY-JETTM VERSUS
CONVENTIONAL HOME CARE

By

Michael A. Sutton

May 2007

Chair: Timothy T. Wheeler
Major: Dental Sciences

Orthodontic appliances can accumulate plaque, leading to gingivitis, enamel

decalcification, and dental decay. Currently, plaque removal in the orthodontic onfce is limited

to tooth-brushing after wire removal. A prospective randomized clinical trial was conducted to

compare the Prophy-JetTM to manual tooth-brushing for removing dental plaque and effecting

bacterial content of plaque.

Our study included 24 orthodontic patients with Eixed appliances showing poor oral

hygiene were recruited to participate in the study for 7 consecutive orthodontic appointments

(To-T6). The study group consisted of 17 males and 7 females with an average age of 14.1 years

(range 10 to 17). Subjects were randomly assigned to two groups. The first group had their teeth

cleaned each visit with the Prophy-JetTM by a dental professional; the second group brushed their

own teeth with a manual tooth brush at each visit. Plaque Index (PI), Papillary Bleeding Score

(PB S), and Decalcifieation Index (DI) were assessed throughout the study. In addition to the

indices, plaque samples were taken for analysis of the bacterial content by DNA-DNA

hybridization.









There was a significantly lower mean change in PI score for the prophy-j et group

compared to the toothbrush group comparing baseline to time point 6 (prophy-j et mean change -

0.42, toothbrush mean change 0.20, positive change indicates improvement). The bacteria

species present in the plaque samples remained fairly constant. The samples tested positive for

the same bacteria at different time points and different patients. The Prophy-JetTM had no effect

on plaque content. Cleanings with the Prophy-JetTM at each orthodontic visit were not effective

in changing the PI, DI, PBS or bacterial content of orthodontic patients with poor oral hygiene

when compared to conventional tooth brushing.









CHAPTER 1
INTTRODUCTION

Dental biofilm has long been associated with tooth decay and periodontal disease. Fixed

orthodontic appliances, specifically brackets bonded to teeth, can accumulate plaque, and may

interfere with effective plaque removal. Proper oral hygiene by patients undergoing orthodontic

treatment, is usually difficult to maintain. Accumulated dental plaque in orthodontic patients has

been associated with enamel decalcification, enamel scarring, dental decay, and gingivitis.

Highly aciduric bacteria such as Streptococcus mutans and lactobacilli have been reported

following the placement of orthodontic appliances.l These microorganisms produce acid as a

metabolic byproduct lowering the intraoral pH, and increasing the risk of decalcification or white

spot formation.2 In a study of decalcification incidence, 50% of orthodontic patients experienced

an increase in decalcification during treatment, with the highest incidence in the maxillary

incisor region and lowest incidence in the maxillary posterior region.3

In addition to decalcification, several studies have also shown strong correlations between

the microbial composition of subgingival biofilms and periodontal disease, most notably species

such as P. gingivalis and A. actinomycetemcomitans. Aa has been associated with aggressive

periodontitis.4 Although methodologies for characterizing the microbial flora in a dental biofilm

vary greatly, the importance of elucidating the bacterial species that may be responsible for

causing a wide range of oral health problems, ranging from periodontal disease to dental caries,

cannot be exaggerated; especially considering recent research implicating periodontal disease as

a risk factor for cardiovascular complications, low term birth weight, and diabetes.

Since its introduction in 1977, air-powder polishing systems have been effective at

removing stain and plaque.' The design of the various air-powder polishing systems, such as

Dentsply's Prophy-JetTM, use a mixture of air, water, and sodium bicarbonate to deliver a









controlled stream of sodium bicarbonate particles to the tooth surface. Advantages of air

polishers include rapid removal of tooth deposits, less invoked hypersensitivity;6,7 leSs operator

fatigue;s and improved access to pits and fissures.9 Currently, plaque removal in the orthodontic

office is selectively limited to tooth-brushing after wire removal. This method of plaque removal

requiring wire removal relies on the patient's ability to effectively remove the plaque with a

manual tooth-brush. The Prophy-JetTM has been shown to be effective in general dental patients

during supportive periodontal therapy, and to decrease decalcification in orthodontic patients.'0

Its effect on the microorganisms within plaque has not been studied.

The aims of this clinical trial were to evaluate the long-term effects of monthly

debridements with the Prophy-JetTM in orthodontic patients with poor oral hygiene on gingivitis,

decalcification, and plaque accumulation; to evaluate the effect on biofilm content with the

Prophy-JetTM in orthodontic patients with poor oral hygiene using the DNA-DNA hybridization

technique; to compare the effectiveness of the Prophy-JetTM to currently used method of manual

tooth-brushing.









CHAPTER 2
MATERIALS AND IVETHODS

The study was designed as a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. Patients

undergoing orthodontic treatment with brackets and wires in the maxillary and mandibular

arches between the ages of 10 and 18 were recruited from the Graduate Orthodontic Clinic at the

University of Florida, College of Dentistry. Other selection criteria for inclusion in the trial were

the presence of extensive amounts of visually detectable plaque around the orthodontic

appliances as identified by the operator, good health with no current medications, and

willingness to sign informed consent. Participants agreed to continue their normal daily home

care routine, and refrain from professional cleaning during the study. The Institutional Review

Board for research at the University of Florida approved the protocol prior to starting the study.

The subj ects were randomly assigned to two groups by a computer-generated sequence.

The first group had their teeth cleaned with the Prophy-JetTM by a dental professional; the second

group brushed their own teeth with a manual tooth brush at each visit. For participation in the

trial, subj ects were financially compensated and received a full mouth debridement with the

Prophy-JetTM at completion of the study.

The protocol for each clinical visit was designed based on a previous study that was

conducted in 2003 at the University of Florida.10 Participants were seen for a total of seven

clinical visits, the first consisting of a baseline examination of dental health parameters including

the collection of clinical indices, and an initial plaque sample. At this initial visit, a Prophy-JetTM

cleaning was completed by a dental professional or a manual tooth-brushing by the subj ect.

Also, a plaque sample was taken from each subject. The right maxillary and mandubular lateral

incisors and first premolars were sampled by carefully moving an explorer between the

orthodontic bracket and gingival margin. Samples were stored at -80.C in 1ml of TE buffer









solution for DNA-DNA hybridization analysis at the completion of the study. Subj ects were

then seen at regular orthodontic appointments for 7 visits, at which times clinical indices were

recorded and plaque samples collected.

The labial surfaces of teeth bonded with brackets from the 2nd premolars forward were

included in this assessment. The following clinical indices were measured for this study.

Plaque levels were assessed from 0 to 5 using the Turesky modification of the Quigley-

Hein Plaque Index (PI).11 The PI was recorded at each visit before the Prophy-JetTM or

toothbrush cleaning were completed.

Decalcifications were assessed visually and tactilely with a dental explorer and scored

from 0 to 4 by using a modified version of the white spot lesion index of Gorelick et al.3 The

decalcification index (DI) was measured at baseline, time point 3, and time point 6.

Decalcification assessment was recorded after removal of plaque to allow complete unobstructed

visualization of the enamel.

Gingivitis was assessed at each visit with a score of 1 to 5 using the Papillary Bleeding

Score (PBS) of Loesche.12 A Stimu-dentTM was used to stimulate the interdental papilla, which

is a common site of gingival inflammation for orthodontic patients. Subsequent gingival

bleeding was used as a measure of gingival health.

A single operator performed all measurements and cleaning. Before recruitment of

subj ects for the Prophy-JetTM study, the operator was calibrated by a calibrated by a standardized

examiner on the three clinical indices (DI, PI, and PB S). Use of the Prophy-JetTM was also

calibrated to ensure consistency. Five orthodontic patients meeting the inclusion criteria of the

planned study were examined by operator and hygienist and standardization and reproducibility

of indices were demonstrated. These patients were not included in the clinical trial.










Twenty-four orthodontic patients with fixed appliances showing poor oral hygiene were

recruited to participate in the study. The study group consisted of 17 males and 7 females with

an average age of 14. 1 years (range 10 to 17). Over the course of the study, 8 patients were

eliminated for missing appointments or discontinuing orthodontic treatment, leaving a total of 16

patients to complete the study.

Collected plaque samples were stored in 1ml of TE buffer (10 mM Tris-HCL, ImM

EDTA, pH 7.6) at -80.C and analyzed for bacteria content using checkerboard DNA-DNA

hybridization. The process originally described by Socransky and Wall-Manning was followed

for the analysis.13,14,15 However, the BrightStar system (Ambion, Inc., Austin TX) was

substituted for the digoxigenin-labeling system. Table 2-1 shows a list of bacterial strains used

for probes in the analysis.

Table 2-1. Bacteria analysed by DNA-DNA hybridization
Streptococcus gordonii* Actinomyces isralii
Streptococcus mutans Actinomyces naeslundii*
Streptococcus oralis* Actinomyces odontolyticus*
Streptococcus salvarius Actinomyces viscosus
Prevatella intermedia* Porphyromonas gingivalis*
Prevatella oralis* Lactobacillus casei
Fusabacterium nucleatum* Lactobacillus rhamosus
Veillonella parvula* Tannerella forsythensis*
Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans*
* Bacteria present in the plaque samples









CHAPTER 3
STATISTICAL METHOD

Changes in mean scores that occurred during treatment for PI, DI, and PBS were evaluated

with the 2-sample t-test, as well as the Wilcox rank sum test. The presence or absence of

bacteria in the plaque samples were not statically evaluated.









CHAPTER 4
RESULTS

Twenty-four orthodontic patients with Eixed appliances showing poor oral hygiene were

recruited to participate in a study comparing the Prophy-JetTM to manual tooth brushing. The

study group consisted of 17 males and 7 females with an average age of 14.1 years (range 10 to

17). Over the course of the study, 8 patients were eliminated for missing appointments or

discontinuing orthodontic treatment, leaving a total of 16 patients to complete the study. The 16

subj ects consisted of 11 males, 5 females, 8 in the Prophy-JetTM group and 8 in the toothbrush

group. At baseline (To) there were no statistical differences between the two groups for PI, DI,

or PBS. The low number of subj ects (16) did not provide adequate power to detect clinically

significant differences.

The change in mean PI scores in the maxillary arch between the Prophy-JetTM and

toothbrush groups was statistically significant comparing baseline to time point 6 (prophy-j et

mean change -0.42, toothbrush mean change 0.20, positive change indicates improvement). The

Prophy-JetTM subj ects demonstrated a greater PI score with significance levels of p=0.05 at T6.

No statistical significance for PI score was found in the mandibular arch (Figure 4-1). A

comparison of the cleaning effectiveness between the Prophy-JetTM and manual tooth-brushing

for each visit is illustrated in Figure 4-1.

The change between baseline and time point 6 in mean decalcification scores (Figure 4-2)

between the Prophy-JetTM and toothbrush was borderline statistically significant (p=0.06)

(prophy-j et mean change -0. 11, toothbrush mean change -0.01, negative change indicates

worsening) in the maxillary arch only. Thus, the prophy-jet group had a greater increase in

decalcification score with a significance level ofp = 0.06 at T6. No statistical significance for

decalcification score was found in the mandibular arch (Figure 4-2)









Although there was a trend of decreasing papillary bleeding scores over time, these were

not statistical significance for in either arch (Figure 4-3).

Results of the DNA-DNA hybridization showed little to no change between patients in the

two groups or between time points. The plaque samples consistently tested positive for the

bacteria highlighted in Table 2-1. Intensity of staining was scored on a scale of 0-3 and equated

to approximately 105 to 107 cells. Bacteria present, decalcifieation presence, total treatment time

and treatment group data were cross referenced and examined for any correlations. Time

intervals between subj ect visits are presented in Table 4-1. Inspection of these data showed no

relationship between the amount of time, presence or absence of decalcifieation, presence or

absence of certain bacteria and treatment group.

Table 4-1. Number of days between appointments for each patient
Patient No. TO T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 Total
1 0 35 38 42 33 22 45 215
3 0 49 28 24 32 43 57 233
4 0 21 41 84 33 70 89 338
5 0 45 28 56 51 59 67 306
6 0 34 26 33 44 21 34 192
7 0 27 37 34 55 26 33 212
8 0 64 27 43 40 34 27 235
9 0 27 37 34 28 54 49 229
10 0 45 34 34 57 34 41 245
12 0 27 37 27 49 42 54 236
14 0 37 34 28 35 34 31 199
19 0 41 28 42 27 29 27 194
21 0 35 14 33 28 34 28 172
22 0 28 33 40 19 48 30 198
23 0 42 43 34 55 42 40 256
24 0 42 43 34 55 42 40 256















































T'~m


MX PJ
MX TB
O MD PJ
O MD TB


TO T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6
Time Point


Figure 4-1. Plaque Index Scores (mean & SE, n = 16). MX PJ = Maxillary Prophy-Jet, MX TB
Maxillary Toothbrush, MD PJ = Mandibular Prophy-Jet, MD TB = Mandibular
Toothbrush


MX PJ
H MX TB
O MD PJ
O MD TB


Time Point


Figure 4-2. Decalcification Index Scores (mean & SE, n = 16). MX PJ = Maxillary Prophy-Jet,
MX TB = Maxillary Toothbrush, MD PJ = Mandibular Prophy-Jet, MD TB =
Mandibular Toothbrush














1.4

3 1.2



," H MX TB
S0.8
O MD PJ
,$ 0.6 O MD TB

d;0.4

0.2



TO T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6

Time Point



Figure 4-3. Papillary Bleeding Score (mean + SE, n = 16). MX PJ = Maxillary Prophy-Jet, MX
TB = Maxillary Toothbrush, MD PJ = Mandibular Prophy-Jet, MD TB = Mandibular
Toothbrush









CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION

The present study was conducted as a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial on

16 orthodontic patients with full fixed appliances demonstrating visible supragingival plaque.

By selecting patients in orthodontic treatment with poor oral hygiene, this study attempted to

determine whether regular Prophy-JetTM cleaning would minimize the harmful effects of plaque

thereby reducing any negative effects.

A study by Barnes and Gerbo et al.16 inVCStigated the application the Prophy-JetTM device

in an orthodontic setting. The study showed that the Prophy-JetTM was more effective in

removing plaque around orthodontic appliances; and required less time than traditional rubber

cup/pumice prophylaxis.

In the present study, the outcomes of plaque debridement at regular orthodontic visits

showed no difference between the Prophy-JetTM and toothbrush groups for PI, although at time

point 6, the toothbrush group had statistically significant lower plaque scores (Figure 1). PI

scores were taken at the beginning of each appointment after the patient rinsed with disclosing

solution. It can be speculated that the amount of plaque accumulation was closely related to the

time interval since the patient last brushed his or her teeth. Patients seen during morning

appointments seemed to have much less plaque accumulated as compared to afternoon

appointments where the patient had eaten lunch and gone all day without brushing. Therefore,

PI scores could vary greatly depending on appointment time. For future studies, plaque samples

should be taken at the same time each day to prevent this confounding problem.

Another possible reason for the lack of improvement by the Prophy-JetTM cleaning on

plaque levels, gingival inflammation, and decalcification may be explained by biofilm formation

and the study design. The salivary pellicle begins to form within minutes to hours after









professional dental cleaning and the initial colonizers are gram positive bacteria such as

Streptococcus and Actinomyces species.13 Over the following days, the plaque increases in

thickness and quantity as gram-negative cocci and gram-positive and gram-negative rods and

filaments increase their presence. The subjects included in this study were identified as having

poor oral hygiene and while the duration of time between appointments apparently was enough

time for plaque levels and gingivitis to return to baseline levels, it might be possible that if these

time intervals were closer, a beneficial reduction might be seen. Any potential benefits of a

professional cleaning would have to be maintained by the patients in their home care in order to

minimize the damaging effects of plaque accumulation on the teeth and surrounding

periodontium. However, poor oral hygiene patients are the ones that would most benefit from

additional hygiene measures and might need more frequent intervention.

Oral hygiene maintenance by the subj ect appears to be very important in decreasing the

time interval for bacteria to recolonize. A 4-week study completed by Ho et al. 17 compared the

Sonicare toothbrush to a manual toothbrush. The subjects had full Eixed orthodontic appliances

and were instructed to brush every morning and evening for 2 minutes. The results showed

statistically lower scores for plaque index, gingival index, and sites which bled on probing for

the Sonicare group. Also, there was a decrease in the amount of total gram-negative bacteria in

subgingival plaque samples in the same group. This may indicate that more frequent cleaning

with the Prophy-JetTM and reinforcing home care could increase oral health of the patients.

This study was patterned after a clinical trial completed by Albert et al. 2003, where

regular cleaning with the Prophy-JetTM were shown to decrease decalcification in orthodontic

subjects.'0 Albert used a split mouth design, in which one side of the mouth was cleaned with

the Prophy-JetTM and the other side was cleaned by manual tooth brushing. Possibilities for a









decrease in the decalcifieation index include interference in the colonization of certain bacteria

into the developing plaque on the tooth surface. Although there are numerous species of bacteria

in plaque, most are noncariogenic.xs Primary etiologic bacteria in dental caries include

Streptococcus mutans and Streptococcus sobrinus with Lactobacilli as a secondary invader

involved in caries progression in enamel.19 Thus, even in the presence of unaltered plaque levels

and gingivitis, the monthly debridement by the Prophy-JetTM may have altered the bacterial load

by physical disruption and prevented more harmful organisms from colonizing and promoting

the decalcifieation process. The current study did not reach statistical significance which may

have been due to the limited number of subj ects.

Plaque content showed little change in volume or species present over the course of the

study It was of interest that although the samples were taken from supragingival areas (between

the bracket and gingival margin) the plaque resembled mature subgingival samples.20 IHStead of

showing large numbers of Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus species, there were large

amounts of Actinomyces odontolyticus, Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans, Tannerella

fa, g thensi\, Veillonella parvula, and Streptococcus oralis indicative of subgingival flora. This

could be a product of the environment created by the bracket/tooth interface. The bracket

mimics an overhanging restoration where bacteria can conlonize and mature in an anaerobic

environment similar to subgingival tooth surfaces. It has been observed that dental restorations

and fixed orthodontics increase the amount of plaque around teeth and cause more inflammation.

29 A study comparing the subgingival microbial composition 3 months after bracket placement

showed an increase in P. gingivalis, P. intermedia, and T. J;, s 9-ibia in orthodontic subj ects.21 The

current study displayed these bacteria in the supragingival plaque samples indicating that

conditions mimicked the a subgingival environment. In addition, another study of microbial









flora on metal and ceramic brackets showed the presence of A. odontolyticus and Aa.22 Both

types of bacteria were present in large amounts in our study. Even though we did not observe an

increase in decalcification in these subj ects, it is possible with more time or an increase in

subj ect number that these differences would be observed.

The volume of bacteria could have an important role in health tissue. Cleaning has been

shown to reduce the bacterial count in patients and a subsequent decrease in both gingival index

score and plaque index.23 In this study, plaque was collected inconsistently by scraping 4

designated teeth. One to three swipes with an explorer was use to collect a generous amount of

plaque possible. If the gingiva was hyperplastic and encroached on the bracket, the sample could

contain subgingival bacteria. This was common in the premolar area. A possible solution to this

problem would be to collect plaque by swiping a paper point between the bracket and the

gingiva. This may create a more consistent and reliable result. In addition, plaque volumes

could be quantified using new digital subtraction techniques.

Another problem encountered was that the DNA hybridization technique used whole

genomic DNA with which cross reactions commonly occur. For example, pure DNA was run

against the probes Pg which also cross reacted with other bacteria species. On the other hand,

Aa was present in all subj ects and did not cross react. This means Pg may or may not have been

present in the samples, but Aa was definitely present in all samples. The presence of Aa is

consistent with a study that reported 80% of young orthodontic patients are infected with Aa.

The orthodontic patients showed more inflammation than non-orthodontic patients, but this did

not necessarily correlate with the presence of Aa .24

Further limitations of the study include the small sample size which may not be

representative of orthodontic patients as a whole. The low number of subj ects was well under










the 100 subj ects necessary to complete this study as determined by power analysis. Other

potential limitations include geographic sampling bias, lack of blinding due to the single operator

for decalcification index, effect of extraneous factors such as manual dexterity for the patients,

and selection of clinical indices.









CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSION

Adequate home care is thought to be critical in maintaining oral hygiene and preventing

decalcifications. For the present study, the Prophy-JetTM proved to be unsuccessful in

maintaining oral health or changing the biofilm content in orthodontic patients. Further research

is necessary with an adequate patient population to further study this issue.









LIST OF REFERENCES

1 Lundstrom F, Krasse B. Strptococcus mutans and lactobacilli frequency in orthodontic
patients. European Journal of Orthodontics 1987;9: 109-1 16

2 Mitchell L. Decalcifieation during orthodontic treatment with Eixed appliances-an
overview. British Journal of Orthodontics 1992; 19: 199-205

3 Gorelick L, Geiger AM, Gwinnett AJ. Incidence of white spot formation after banding
and bonding. Am J Orthod 1982;81:93.

4 Socransky SS, Haffaj ee AD, Cugini MA, Smith C, Kent Jr. RL: Microbial complexes in
subgingival plaque. J Periodontol 1998;25:134-144

5 Brown DM, Barnhart RC. A scientific foundation for clinical use of air polishing
systems. J Pract Hyg 1995;4:36-40.

6 Atkinson DR, Cobb CM, and Killoy WJ. The effect of an air-powder abrasive system on
in vitro root surfaces. J Periodontol 1984;55:13-18.

7 Galloway SE, Pashley DH. Rate of removal of root structure by the use of the Prophy-j et
device. J Periodontol 1987;7:464-469.

8 Weaks LM, Clinical evaluation of the Prophy-Jet as an instrument for routine removal of
tooth stain and plaque. J Periodontol 1984;55(8):486-8

9 Strand GV, Randal M. Efficiency of cleaning fissures with an air-polishing instrument.
Acm Odontol Scand 1988;46:113-117.

10 Albert et al. Clincal evaluation of the Prophy-Jet in Routine Plaque Debridement of
Orthodontic patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007, in press

11 Quigley GA, Hein JW. Comparative cleaning efficiency of manual and power brushing.
J Am Dent Assoc 1962;65:26.

12 Loesche W J Clinical and microbiological aspects of chemotherapeutic agents used
according to the specific plaque hypothesis. J Dent Res 1979;58:2402-2412.

13 Socransky SS, Haffaj ee AD, Smith C, Martin L, Haffaj ee JA, Uzel NG, Goodson JM.
Use of checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridization to study complex microbial ecosystems.
Oral Microbiol Immunol. 2004 Dec; 19(6):3 52-62.

14 Socransky SS, et al. "Checkerboard" DNA-DNA Hybridization. Biotechniques. 1994;
17:488-492









15 Wall-Manning GM, Sissons CH, Anderson SA, Lee M. Checkerboard DNA-DNA
Hybridization technology focused on the analysis of gram-positive cariogenic bacteria. J.
Micaobiol. Meth. 2002; 51:301-311

16 Gerbo LR, Barnes CM, Leinfelder KF. Applications of the air-powder polisher in clinical
orthodontics. Am J Orthodont Dentofacial Orthop 1993;103:71-73.

17 Ho HP, Niederman R, Effectiveness of the Sonicare sonic toothbrush on reduction of
plaque, gingivitis, probing pocket depth and subgingival bacteria in adolescent
orthodontic patients. J Clin. Dent. 1997;8:15-19

18 Rosan B, Lamont R. Dental plaque formation. Microbes and Infection. 2000; 1599-1607

19 Rateitschak KH, Wolf HF, Hassell TM. Color Atlas of Dental Medicine: Periodontology.
1989; Thieme Medical Publishers; New York, NY

20 Listgarten MA, Structure of the microbial flora associated with periodontal health and
disease in man. J Periodontol. 1976;47:1-18

21 Naraj o AA, Trivino ML, Jaramillo A, Betancourth M, Botero JE. Changes in the
subgingival microbiota and periodontal parameters before and 3 months after bracket
placement. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006; 130:el7-275.e22

22 Anhoury P, Nathanson D, Hughes CV, Socransky S, Feres M, Chou LL. Microbial
Profile on Metallic and Ceramic Bracket Materials. Angle Orthodontist. 2002;72:338-343

23 Goodson JM, et al. Microbiological changes associated with dental prophylaxis. JADA
2004; 135:1559-64

24 Paolantoio M, Pedrazzoli V, di Murro C, di Placido G, Picciani C, Catamo G, De Luca
M, Piccolomini R. Clinical significance of Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans in
young individuals during orthodontic treatment. A 3-year longitudinal study. J Clin
Periodontol. 1997;24:610-617









BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Michael Sutton was born and raised in Allentown, Pennsylvania. He received his degree

of Bachelor of Science in civil engineering and a minor in environmental engineering at the

Pennsylvania State University in 1997. In 2004, he earned a degree of Doctor of Dental

Medicine from the Temple University School of Dentistry. Upon completion of his dental

training, he continued his education at the University of Florida, College of Dentistry, receiving

a certificate in orthodontics and Master of Science in 2007.