Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 109325

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionAcknowledgementReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2022 | Month : November | Volume : 16 | Issue : 11 | Page : ZC20 - ZC26 Full Version

Comparison of Laser-assisted and Conventional Flap Surgery with Hydroxyapatite Crystals in the Treatment of Intrabony Defects under Magnification- A Randomised Clinical Trial


Published: November 1, 2022 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2022/58670.17120
Meghana Gangolu, Mohan Kumar Pasupuleti, Gautami S Penmetsa, NVS Sruthima Gottumukkala, Santosh Venkata Ramesh Konathala, Bharghavi Patnaik Balivada, Lahari Karuturi

1. Postgraduate Student, Department of Periodontics, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India. 2. Associate Professor, Department of Periodontics, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India. 3. Professor and Head, Department of Periodontics, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India. 4. Professor, Department of Periodontics, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India. 5. Associate Professor, Department of Periodontics, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India. 6. Postgraduate Student, Department of Periodontics, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India. 7. Postgraduate Student, Department of Periodontics, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Mohan Kumar Pasupuleti,
Associate Professor, Department of Periodontics and Implantology, Vishnu Dental College, Vishnupur, Bhimavaram-534202, Andhra Pradesh, India.
E-mail: mosups@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Achieving regeneration of the lost periodontal structures after surgical approach plays a major role. This healing can be interrupted due to the presence of invasive bacteria which is present in the periodontal tissues.

Aim: To compare laser-assisted and conventional flap surgery using microsurgical instruments and under surgical operating microscope with hydroxyapatite graft in the treatment of intrabony defects.

Materials and Methods: This prospective randomised split-mouth clinical study was conducted in Department of Periodontology at Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India, from June 2020 to December 2021. A total of 24 bilateral intrabony defects were selected for the study. Control sites (n=12) received the graft after conventional open flap debridement. In the test group (n=12), graft placement was done followed by laser irradiation with diode laser (980 nm, power: 3.0 W; frequency 2.5 KHz) for 30 seconds. The entire flap surgery procedure was performed under Surgical Operating Microscope (SOM). Clinical parameters such as plaque index, gingival index, probing depth, relative attachment level, were assessed at 3 months and 6 months. Healing index was assessed after 7 days of surgery. Radiographic parameters were assessed at baseline and 6 months using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT). Descriptive statistics, Independent samples t-test, repeated measures analysis of variance and paired t-tests were used in data analysis. Data were analysed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20.0 software.

Results: Intragroup comparison showed statistical significance in all clinical and radiographical parameters (p-value <0.001). Intergroup comparison between the test and control group did not show any statistical significance in terms of plaque index, gingival index, relative clinical attachment level, probing depth (p-value ≥0.05). Intragroup comparison of the depth of defect was statistically significant in both test (p-value=0.011) and control groups (p-values=0.002). Intergroup comparison did not show any statistical significance in linear bone fill (p-value=0.1). Intergroup comparison did not show any statistical significance in defect angle (p-value=0.773). No statistical significance was obtained in percentage fill (p-value=0.074). Intergroup comparison did not show any statistical significance in the clinical and radiographical parameters.

Conclusion: The additional laser irradiation at the test site did not exhibit any significant benefits in the bone regeneration. All the outcomes were similar in test and control group.

Keywords

Bone graft, Healing, Periodontitis, Regeneration, Surgical operating microscope

Periodontal disease is the inflammation of supporting tissues of the teeth, leading to progressive attachment loss and bone loss around the teeth leading to pocket formation or recession. Patterns of bone destruction in a periodontal disease can be seen in various forms but not all the defects are regenerable (1).

The drawback of conventional mechanical therapy in its inability to remove periodontal pathogen especially from inside pocket wall and deep pockets, has paved the way for the adjunctive use of lasers in the treatment of chronic periodontitis (2). Many studies have evaluated the use of diode laser as an adjunctive method in Non Surgical Periodontal Therapy (NSPT) for chronic and aggressive periodontitis patients and have concluded with the superior healing and better treatment outcomes in the laser intervened sites (3),(4),(5). In the treatment of periodontitis and peri-implantitis, diode lasers are being used for reduction of bacterial load and removal of pocket lining, thereby decreasing the endotoxins leading to enhanced periodontal tissue healing (6).

Not only the proper sanitisation of the defect site, but also an adequate and appropriate placement of graft material is required for the regeneration of the lost components of the alveolar bone. One of the successful ways to attain reconstruction of lost attachment apparatus in intrabony defects (>3 mm) is grafting of bone substitute biomaterials (7),(8). Vertical or angular defects can be regenerated to a greater extent with the use of bone graft materials, which includes autografts, xenografts, and alloplastic materials (9).

Hydroxyapatite (HA) graft biomaterials are complex calcium phosphates that resemble bone minerals in their chemical component {Ca10(PO4)6(OH)4}, with calcium-to-phosphate ratio of 1.67 (10). HA scaffolds can also serve as delivery vehicles for cytokines with a capacity to bind and concentrate Bone Morphogenetic Proteins (BMPs) in-vivo (11). Synthetic HA demonstrates good biological properties including biocompatibility, bioactivity, osteoconduction, and osteoinduction, immunity reactions, and a relatively high bioresorbability. Many authors have concluded it as a suitable bone graft material in the periodontal regeneration after evaluating the clinical and radiographical parameters (12),(13),(14).

Surgical Operating Microscope (SOM) provides the greatest flexibility and comfort in optical magnification and is very superior to magnifying loupes. With proper instructions and practice, operating the microscope becomes easy. It is characterised by binocular viewing system that protects against eyestrain and fatigue. It is also characterised by high resolution lenses and high contrast stereoscopic vision which provides the ease to access of debridement during periodontal surgeries (15).

Laser application in periodontal surgery has showed promising results in the literature (5),(6). Limited research is available in the published literature with the conjunctive application of low level laser in the treatment of intrabony defects and use of SOM in periodontal surgeries (2),(3),(15). Therefore, this clinical study aimed at the evaluation of clinical and radiographic parameters of laser-assisted and conventional flap surgery using microsurgical instruments under surgical operating microscope with hydroxyapatite graft (SybografTM) in the treatment of intrabony defects.

Material and Methods

This prospective randomised split-mouth clinical study was conducted in Department of Periodontology at Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India, from June 2020 to December 2021. Patients who attended Outpatient Department of Periodontology were enrolled. The study was approved and ethical clearance was obtained from the Institutional Ethical Committee (Ref No: IECVDC/19/PG01/PI/IVV/50) and also approved under Clinical Trials Registry-India REF/2020/02/031968. All the procedures were followed according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines and were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional or regional) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975 that was revised in 2013 (16).

Sample size calculation: Sample size of 14 bilateral intrabony defects, including two dropouts was obtained using G Power software (17).

INPUT: t-tests-Means: Difference between two independent means (two groups)

Analysis: A priori: Compute required sample size
Input: Tail (s)= Two
Effect size d=1.241350 (2)
α err prob=0.05
Power (1-β err prob)=0.80
Allocation ratio N2/N1=1
Output: (17) Non centrality parameter δ=3.0406741
Critical t=2.0738731
Df=22
Sample size group 1=12
Sample size group 2=12
Total sample size=24
To compensate 20% drop outs: 12+2=14 per group.

Inclusion and Exclusion criteria: Patients within the age group of 20-65 years, presence of atleast one tooth either on bilateral or ipsilateral sides of the mouth with persistent probing depth (PD) ≥5 mm even after non surgical periodontal therapy and radiographic evidence of intrabony defects with depth ≥3 mm with three wall defects were included in the study. Pregnant or lactating women, chronic smokers and patients with uncontrolled systemic diseases such as diabetes were excluded.

Clinical Parameters

The clinical parameters evaluated were as follows:

• Plaque Index (PI) according to Loe H (18),
• Gingival Index (GI) according to Loe H (18),
• Probing Pocket Depth (PPD) (2),
• Relative-Clinical Attachment Level (R-CAL) (2),
• Early Healing Index (HI) according to Wachtel H et al., (19).

Radiographic parameters: Radiological parameters were evaluated with CBCT were (20):

• Linear amount of bone Fill (LF)
• Depth of Defect (DD)
• Percentage of bone Fill (PF)
• Defect Angle (DA)

All the subjects in the study were subjected to phase 1 therapy i.e, Non Surgical Periodontal Therapy (NSPT), which included scaling, root planing. Following NSPT, periodontal re-evaluation was performed after 1 month. Subjects were randomly divided into two groups by the coin toss method as test and control sites. Coin toss method used to assign the quadrant/site. There were two dropouts in the study due to death after being infected by COVID-19 (Table/Fig 1). Twelve out of 14 patients completed the study. A total of 12 bilateral intrabony defects i.e, 24 sites were finally included in the study. Out of which 12 sites were given HA graft following laser irradiation and other 12 sites were given HA graft without any laser irradiation. A total of 10 mandibular and 14 maxillary intrabony defects sites were included.

Test sites (n=12): Laser-assisted (DenLase) flap surgery followed by placing of hydroxyapatite graft (SybografTM) in the intrabony defects.

Control sites (n=12): Conventional flap surgery followed by placing of hydroxyapatite graft (SybografTM) in the intrabony defects.

Study Procedure

All the clinical parameters that were evaluated in the study were recorded with UNC-15 (Hu-Friedy) probe (University of North Carolina) to the nearest millimetre. Plaque index, gingival index, relative clinical attachment level, probing depth was assessed at baseline, 3 months and 6 months. Wound healing was evaluated on 7th day postoperatively using Early Wound Healing Index (HI) (Wachtel H et al., 2003) (19).

The CBCT evaluation was done at the site of intrabony defects as baseline recordings. Three reference points were considered in the radiographic analysis. They are Cementoenamel Junction (CEJ) of the involved tooth, Alveolar Crest (AC) and Base of the Defect (BD). The intrabony DD was measured by subtracting from the value of CEJ of the involved tooth to the base of the defect with the value from CEJ from the alveolar crest of the uninvolved tooth. This linear measurement is considered as the baseline DD. The radiographic parameters measured at baseline for both the test site and control site prior to the surgical procedure. Similarly, the DD was considered after 6 months of evaluation. The bone fill within the defect after 6 months was considered as LF. Defect angle was considered as the angle that is formed by the two lines that represent the root surface of the tooth involved and the surface of the bone defect. Percentage fill was calculated by dividing linear bone fill at 6 months by defect depth at the baseline multiplied by 100 (2).

Surgical intervention: Local anaesthesia with 2% lignocaine containing adrenaline at a concentration of 1:2,00,000 under aseptic conditions was administered intraorally to the patients. At least three teeth were involved in the flap incisions. Kirkland flap or access flap surgery [2,9] in both test and control sites was performed with microsurgical instruments under 0.4X magnification in SOM (Labomed® Microscopes). According to the coin toss method the type of surgical procedure for the quadrant/site were selected to start therapy and after 1 week interval other surgical procedure was done.

In the test site, after a thorough conventional instrumentation, Diode laser, DenLase (980 nm, power: 3.0W; frequency: 2.5 KHz) was used to remove the inflammed soft tissue lining of the pocket for about 30 seconds thereby ensuring proper pocket sanitisation (21). Later presuturing of the flap was done with NW018 Prolene (Ethicon, Johnson and Johnson) 4-0 sutures. HA (SybografTM) was placed into the defect site. Following the proper adaptation of the bone graft, flap was approximated and closed using simple interrupted sutures using the same suture material. In the control site, following the conventional flap surgical procedure-incision, elevation, debridement and presuturing, where HA (SybografTM) was placed into the defect site and flap was approximated and sutured using simple interrupted sutures with prolene 4-0 suture material (Table/Fig 2),[Table/Fig3].

Postoperative care: Postoperative instructions were given. All the subjects received postoperative antibiotics (amoxicillin 500 mg thrice daily) and analgesics (diclofenac 50 mg twice daily) for 5 days. The subjects were instructed to refrain from tooth brushing at the surgical site for 1 week and were instructed to rinse with 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate mouthwash twice daily for 1 week. After 1 week, periodontal dressing and the sutures were removed and subjects were reinforced with oral hygiene instructions. Comparison of clinical parameters between two groups was done at baseline, 3 months, 6 months except for healing index which was done after one week. Radiographic parameters were done at baseline and 6 months using CBCT.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Data were analysed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20.0 software (IBM SPSS, IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Descriptive statistics, Independent samples t-test, repeated measures Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), and Paired t-tests were used in data analysis. For all the analysis, p-value<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Demographic variables: The age of the patients was ranging between 20-65 years with the mean age of 35±11.36 years. The study group comprised of 6 males and 6 females constituting male to female ratio was 1:1.

Clinical parameters: The values of the clinical parameters were depicted in (Table/Fig 4),(Table/Fig 5).

Plaque index: The mean plaque index scores for the test sites was 0.84±0.29 at baseline which reduced to a mean score of 0.62±0.20 after 3 months and which was reduced to a mean score of 0.48±0.19 at 6 months. Control sites showed mean plaque score of 0.98±0.48 at baseline which reduced to a mean plaque score of 0.66±0.49 at 3 months and 0.51±0.42 at 6 months. The intragroup comparison showed statistical significance (p-value <0.001) (Table/Fig 4). No statistical significance was observed in the baseline, 3 months and 6 months in the intergroup comparison (p-value >0.05) at all intervals (Table/Fig 5).

Gingival index: The mean GI scores for the test sites was 1.22±0.30 at baseline which reduced to a mean score of 0.99±0.39 after 3 months and which was reduced to a mean score of 0.91±0.38 at 6 months. Control sites showed mean GI of 1.37±0.32 at baseline which reduced to a mean gingival score of 1.18±0.38 at 3 months and 0.96±0.44 at 6 months. The intragroup comparison showed statistical significance (p-value <0.001) (Table/Fig 4). No statistical significance was observed in the baseline, 3 months and 6 months in the intergroup comparison (p-value >0.05) at all intervals (Table/Fig 5).

Probing pocket depth: The baseline mean PPD was found to be 6.08±1.44 in test site and it was found to be reduced to 4.67±1.61 at 3 months and 4.08±1.44 at 6 months, was not statistically significant (Table/Fig 4). The baseline mean PPD was found to be 6.75±1.2 in control site and it was found to be reduced to 5.16±1.33 at 3 months and 4.67±1.37 at 6 months. Intergroup comparison between the test and control group did not show any statistical significance (p-value≥0.05) (Table/Fig 4). The intragroup comparison of the PPD values where baseline, 3 months and 6 months was suggested to be statitically significant between both the test and control groups (p-value <0.001) (Table/Fig 4).

Relative-clinical attachment level: The baseline mean R-CAL in test site was observed to be 6.58±2.39 which was reduced to 5.16±2.51 at 3 months and to 4.58±2.39 at 6 months. The baseline mean R-CAL in control site was observed to be 7.75±2.17 which was reduced to 6.16±2.34 at 3 months which was not statistically significant and to 5.67±2.42 at 6 months (Table/Fig 4). Intergroup comparison between the test and control group did not show any statistical significance where p value was found to be ≥0.05 (Table/Fig 5). The intragroup comparison of the R-CAL values where baseline, 3 months and 6 months was suggested to be statistically significant between both the test and control groups (p-value <0.001) (Table/Fig 4).

Healing index: In the present study, healing index was used to study the additional benefit in terms of flap closure with the adjunctive use of diode laser. Both the groups were evaluated in difference in the soft tissue closure and healing patterns. In this study, almost similar type of healing pattern was appreciated among the groups. The mean HI at 7th day after surgery in test sites and control sites were 1.08±0.28 and 1.33±0.49, respectively, which was not statistically significant (p-value=0.143). Though the adjunctive use of lasers had satisfactory healing at test sites when observed after a week, there was no statistical significance obtained when compared within intergroups.

Radiographic Analysis

The values of the radiographical parameters were depicted in (Table/Fig 6). Radiographic assessment was done using the following reference points in the CBCT.

Depth of the defect: Intragroup comparison of the DD was statistically significant in both test and control (p-values=0.011 and p-value=0.002, respectively) (Table/Fig 7). On intergroup comparison, the baseline DD in test and control groups was 4.84±1.16 and 4.66±1.28 respectively, p-value=0.143 which was not statistically significant (Table/Fig 8). At 6 months, the DD values were 3.64±1.28 in test group and 4.16±1.12 in control group (p-value=0.296) (Table/Fig 8).

Linear bone fill: The baseline LF was considered 0 in both test and control sites. After 6 months LF were 1.201±1.35 mm in test group and 0.498±0.415 in control group, respectively. Both sites showed a statistical significance (p-value=0.01) in the test sites and (p-value=0.002) in the control sites (Table/Fig 7). Intergroup comparison did not show any statistical significance (p-value=0.1) (Table/Fig 8).

Defect angle: The DA at baseline showed a mean standard deviation of 50±11.45 in the test group at baseline and 46.25±10.76 after 6 months. It was considered statistically significant (p-value=0.01). Within the control group the mean standard deviation of 48.5±4.7 at baseline and 47.25±4.99 at 6 months was seen with p-value <0.001 showing a statistical significance. Intergroup comparison did not show any statistical significance.

Percentage fill: Intergroup comparison among the PF in the test group after 6 months was 18.11±11.95 in the test group and 10.16±8.49 in the control group, respectively. No statistical significance was obtained and p-value was 0.074.

Discussion

To enhance the regenerative capacity different ways have been used to improve healing of periodontal osseous defects utilising various bone grafts, barrier membranes, growth factors, antimicrobial agents, and lasers alone and in combination (22),(23). The present study focused on the efficacy of the soft tissue laser in the defect debridement which improves the healing of osseous defects, and ultimately leading to increase in outcome of periodontal regeneration.

In the present study, Hydroxyapatite graft was used as a bone graft material in both the groups. The graft was chosen based on the ability of the graft in periodontal regeneration. Koduru S et al., compared the efficacy of (SybografTM) with NovaboneTM in treating the intrabony defects (9). They concluded that HA graft has shown superior bonefill over NovaboneTM over a period of 9 months. In another study, Singh VP et al., in 18 intrabony defects randomly used (SybografTM) and periocol following flap debridement (24). Significant results were shown for the SybografTM group (p-value >0.05) when compared with periocol group. Better results were shown in all the radiographic parameters for the SybografTM group.

Low Level Laser (LLL) shows a positive effect on cell metabolism and stimulate gingival and PDL cell proliferation (25). Aoki A et al., reported that it is difficult to completely eradicate Porphyromonas gingivalis, Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans and Prevotella intermedia after mechanical therapy (non surgical and surgical) and their persistence is associated with poor healing of periodontal pockets (25). Gojkov-Vukelic M et al., used real-time polymerase chain reaction analysis to evaluate the diode laser’s bactericidal efficacy, and the study found a significant drop in the quantity of Porphyromonas gingivalis, Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans immediately after lasing, which decreased further after 3 months (26). Lasers stimulate greater bone growth and repair by decontaminating and detoxifying the body.

Ruertas RM et al., performed the application of a pulsed diode laser (Ezlase) of 940 nm at low energy levels in an in-vitro study. Cell proliferation was enhanced in laser-treated cells at intensities of 0.5, 1, and 1.5 W/cm.sq compared to controls after 24 hours of culture; energy density was positively connected with osteoblast cell growth, which peaked at 3 J and declined at higher fluences (27). Along with the graft material, the adjunctive use of the diode laser did not show any statistical improvement in the regeneration. The results obtained in Kreisler M et al., study, revealed that an 809-nm LLL light had a stimulatory effect on the proliferation of PDL fibroblasts (3).

In the present study, diode laser stimulation prior to the graft placement has showed a better improvement in the regeneration with time, but in comparison with the control group, not much significance statistically was achieved. Whereas, in terms of clinical parameters, this study is in accordance with Jonnalagadda BD et al., where use of DenLase laser showed no statistical significance in the intergroup comparison following laser irradiation in the test sites (28). The present study is in accordance to the study done by Gupta RK et al., in terms of both clinical and radiographical parameters as the results of the present study correlates (2).

This suggests that the diode laser effect on this particular graft (Sybograf) may not be that effective in enhancing the regenerative outcome. This is in contrast with the study done by Ozcelik O et al., where Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT)+Enamel Matrix Derivative in intrabony defects in the test sites and EMD alone in control sites. The EMD+LLLT had resulted in less gingival recession (p-value <0.05), less swelling (p-value <0.001) and less VAS scores (p-value <0.02) compared with EMD alone and concluded that EMD is a predictable material for periodontal regeneration (29).

Application of low level laser contains extreme variations such as dose, wavelength, amount of energy density, required time periods, and treatment intervention time. The dose applied during laser application is one of the important treatment parameters to benefit from LLLT. However, no precisely determined dose has been determined for each indication (30). A single application on a wound site may not be effective in the stimulation of the cells and to reach the borders of the surgical bed. Multiple irradiations therefore are more effective than a single dose. This is an important factor in bone formation and fibroblast growth according to study by AboElsaad NS et al., (30). In the present study 810 nm diode laser at 1 W power for 30 second was used in the test sites (30).

Low level laser irradiation, when used postoperatively, is directly absorbed by the cellular structures activating the biochemical processes of the osteoblast nucleus and DNA-RNA-protein synthesis, thus accelerating normalisation of the structure of organic and inorganic bone mineral collagen, resulting in enhanced bone healing (31). The lack of intergroup significance in our study can be attributed to the single laser irradiation, as it was performed only during the surgical intervention (32). Second attempt of laser irradiation was not performed in the test sites during the recalls as this may lead to an altered healing in both the sites (31).

Another advantage of the present study was the use of SOM for performing the flap surgeries. Performing the surgeries under magnification has many additional advantages such as it aims to improve the quality in patient care, aids high magnification range and brilliant illumination, increasing precision, improved ergonomic benefit, improving overall dental care, documentation with videography and photography and providing an open field for surgery (33). Limited literature studies are available with the SOM. Many practioners have used surgical loupes as a magnification aid in the periodontal surgeries (34),(35). Though the loupes can be used, the ergonomic benefit, extent of magnification will be definitely higher for a SOM than Loupes (15). The major disadvantage with the SOM can be attributed to its higher cost and a deep learning curve.

Cortellini P and Tonetti MS, had performed surgical debridement in 26 deep intrabony defects under SOM and concluded that 92.3% cases showed satisfactory healing with minimal gingival recession (36). Bittencourt S et al., in a split mouth study for recession coverge has performed the treatment under SOM in 24 subjects where after 12 months 98% and 88.3% of root coverage was achieved and statistical significance was seen in test group in parameters (37). In the current study, statistical significance in clinical parameters was observed with the time intervals within the groups (p-value <0.001). In terms of healing, as a single operator was involved in performing the procedure both at the test and control sites ensuring no operator bias, there was almost an equal evidence of healing pattern clinically and statistically.

Advancements in the field of periodontics is always a benefit for both patients as well as clinicians. Lasers are one such advancement which aids in painless technique, efficient in therapeutic terms and easy to access. Magnification provides numerous benefits in terms of ergonomics, visual activity, and precision in handling the tissues. Considering the literature, controversies are still prevailing regarding effect of lasers on periodontal tissue healing because of utilisation of different parameters for delivery of laser beam and different laser systems used.

Limitation(s)

A smaller sample size of 24 sites cannot give the definitive conclusions in terms of regeneration. Lack of microbiological analysis assessing the bacterial load within the tissues stays a drawback of the study. Further, additional studies are required utilising a larger sample size and proper microbiological analysis can prevail in attaining the substantial outcome of the study.

Conclusion

Complete debridement of the defect site plays a major supportive role in the regeneration of defects. Both conventional and laser assisted method of regeneration did not exhibit any statistical difference in the clinical and radiographical parameters in our study. Further, long-term studies with a larger sample size and repeated laser applications of laser irradiation are recommended.

Acknowledgement

Authors are grateful to Prof. Nimmakayala Deepthi, working at Kendriya Vidyalaya School, Hyderabad, Telangana as PGET for her kind help in English proofreading of the manuscript.

References

1.
Prathap S, Hegde S, Kashyap R, Prathap MS, Arunkumar MS. Clinical evaluationof porous hydroxyapatite bone graft (Periobone G) with and without collagen membrane (Periocol) in the treatment of bilateral grade II furcation defects in mandibular first permanent molars. J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2013;17(2):228. [crossref] [PubMed]
2.
Gupta RK, Singh B, Goyal S, Rani N. Effect of laser application in the healing of intrabony defects treated with bioactive glass. Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology. 2019;23(2):124. [crossref] [PubMed]
3.
Crispino A, Figliuzzi MM, Iovane C, Del Giudice T, Lomanno S, Pacifico D, et al. Effectiveness of a diode laser in addition to non-surgical periodontal therapy: Study of intervention. Ann Stomatol (Roma). 2015;6(1):15-20. [crossref] [PubMed]
4.
Kamma JJ, Vasdekis VG, Romanos GE. The effect of diode laser (980 nm) treatment on aggressive periodontitis: Evaluation of microbial and clinical parameters. Photomed Laser Surg. 2009;27(1):11-19. [crossref] [PubMed]
5.
Kreisler M, Al Haj H, d’Hoedt B. Clinical efficacy of semiconductor laser application as an adjunct to conventional scaling and root planing. Lasers Surg Med. 2005;37(5):350-55. [crossref] [PubMed]
6.
Cobb CM, Low SB, Coluzzi DJ. Lasers and the treatment of chronic periodontitis. Dental Clinics. 2010;54(1):35-53. [crossref] [PubMed]
7.
Cortellini P, Tonetti MS. Clinical concepts for regenerative therapy in intrabony defects. Periodontology 2000. 2015;68(1):282-07. [crossref] [PubMed]
8.
Bayani M, Torabi S, Shahnaz A, Pourali M. Main properties of nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite as a bone graft material in treatment of periodontal defects. A review of literature. Biotechnology & Biotechnological Equipment. 2017;31(2):215-20. [crossref]
9.
Koduru S, Aghanashini S, Nadiger S, Apoorva SM, Bhat D, Puvvalla B, et al. A clinical and radiographic evaluation of the efficacy of nanohydroxyapatite (Sybograf™) versus bioactive calcium phosphosilicate putty (Novabone®) in the treatment of human periodontal infrabony defects: A randomised clinical trial. Contemp Clin Dent. 2019;10(1):16-23. [crossref] [PubMed]
10.
Newman MG, Takei H, Klokkevold PR. Carranza’s clinical periodontology. 12th ed. St. Louis (MO): Saunders Elsevier; 2014.
11.
Ohgushi H, Dohi Y, Tamai S, Tabata S. Osteogenic differentiation of marrow stromal stem cells in porous hydroxyapatite ceramics. J Biomed Mater Res. 1993;27(11):1401-07. [crossref] [PubMed]
12.
Talal A, McKay IJ, Tanner KE, Hughes FJ. Effects of hydroxyapatite and PDGF concentrations on osteoblast growth in a nanohydroxyapatite-polylactic acid composite for guided tissue regeneration. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2013;24(9):2211-21. [crossref] [PubMed]
13.
Kamboj M, Arora R, Gupta H. Comparative evaluation of the efficacy of synthetic nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite bone graft (Ostim®) and synthetic microcrystalline hydroxyapatite bone graft (Osteogen®) in the treatment of human periodontal intrabony defects: A clinical and denta scan study. J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2016;20(4):423. [crossref] [PubMed]
14.
Elgendy EA, Shady TE. Clinical and radiographic evaluation of nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite with or without platelet-rich fibrin membrane in the treatment of periodontal intrabony defects. J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2015;19(1):61. [crossref] [PubMed]
15.
Mohan Kumar P, Jaswitha V, Gautami SP, Ramesh KS. Applications of microscope in periodontal therapy-Role in magnification really matters! IP Int J Periodontol Implantol. 2019;4(1):01-05. [crossref]
16.
World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 2001;79(4):373.
17.
Kang H. Sample size determination and power analysis using the G* Power software. J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2021;18:17. [crossref] [PubMed]
18.
Löe H. The gingival index, the plaque index and the retention index systems. The J Periodontol. 1967;38(6):610-16. [crossref] [PubMed]
19.
Wachtel H, Schenk G, Böhm S, Weng D, Zuhr O, Hürzeler MB. Microsurgical access flap and enamel matrix derivative for the treatment of periodontal intrabony defects: A controlled clinical study. J Clin Periodontol. 2003;30(6):496-504. [crossref] [PubMed]
20.
Jayakumar A, Rohini S, Naveen A, Haritha A, Reddy K. Horizontal alveolar bone loss: A periodontal orphan. J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2010;14(3):181-85. [crossref] [PubMed]
21.
Tirumalasetty SS, Anusha G, Anupama M, Jonnalagadda BD, Salavadhi SS, Maloth KN. Applications of diode lasers in periodontics: A case series. Annals of Medical and Health Sciences Research. 2019.
22.
Liang Y, Luan X, Liu X. Recent advances in periodontal regeneration: A biomaterial perspective. Bioact Mater. 2020;5(2):297-08. [crossref] [PubMed]
23.
Lobo TM, Pol DG. Evaluation of the use of a 940 nm diode laser as an adjunct in flap surgery for treatment of chronic periodontitis. J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2015;19(1):43-48. [crossref] [PubMed]
24.
Singh VP, Nayak DG, Uppoor AS, Shah D. Clinical and radiographic evaluation of Nano-crystalline hydroxyapatite bone graft (Sybograf®) in combination with bioresorbable collagen membrane (Periocol®) in periodontal intrabony defects. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2012;9(1):60-67.[crossref] [PubMed]
25.
Aoki A, Mizutani K, Schwarz F, Sculean A, Yukna RA, Takasaki AA, et al. Periodontal and peri-implant wound healing following laser therapy. Periodontology 2000. 2015;68(1):217-69. [crossref] [PubMed]
26.
Gojkov-Vukelic M, Hadzic S, Dedic A, Konjhodzic R, Beslagic E. Application of a diode laser in the reduction of targeted periodontal pathogens. Acta Informatica Medica. 2013;21(4):237. [crossref] [PubMed]
27.
Huertas RM, Luna-Bertos ED, Ramos-Torrecillas J, Leyva FM, Ruiz C, García- Martínez O, et al. Effect and clinical implications of the low-energy diode laser on bone cell proliferation. Biol Res Nurs. 2014;16(2):191-96. [crossref] [PubMed]
28.
Jonnalagadda BD, Gottumukkala SN, Dwarakanath CD, Koneru S. Effect of diode laser-assisted flap surgery on postoperative healing and clinical parameters: A randomised controlled clinical trial. Contemp Clin Dent. 2018;9(2):205-12. [crossref] [PubMed]
29.
Ozcelik O, Cenk Haytac M, Seydaoglu G. Enamel matrix derivative and lowlevel laser therapy in the treatment of intra-bony defects: A randomised placebocontrolled clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol. 2008;35(2):147-56. [crossref] [PubMed]
30.
AboElsaad NS, Soory M, Gadalla L, Ragab LI, Dunne S, Zalata KR, et al. Effect of soft laser and bioactive glass on bone regeneration in the treatment of bone defects (an experimental study). Lasers Med Sci. 2009;24(4):527-33. [crossref] [PubMed]
31.
Rochkind S, Kogan G, Luger EG, Salame K, Karp E, Graif M, et al. Molecular structure of the bony tissue after experimental trauma to the mandibular region followed by laser therapy. Photomedicine and laser surgery. 2004;22(3):249-53. [crossref] [PubMed]
32.
Mullins SL, MacNeill SR, Rapley JW, Williams KB, Eick JD, Cobb CM, et al. Subgingival microbiologic effects of one-time irradiation by CO2 laser: A pilot study. J Periodontol. 2007;78(12):2331-37. Doi: 10.1902/jop.2007.070156. PMID: 18052706. [crossref] [PubMed]
33.
Nizam N, Bengisu O, Sönmez S¸ . Micro- and macrosurgical techniques in the coverage of gingival recession using connective tissue graft: 2 years follow-up. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2015;27(2):71-83. [crossref] [PubMed]
34.
Shetty S, Thoudam B. Comparative evaluation of microsurgical and conventional open flap surgical procedure outcomes in patients with periodontitis-A histopathological & scanning electron microscopy study. Biomed J Sci & Tech Res. 2018;6(5):5503-08. [crossref]
35.
Penmetsa GS, Panda KD, Manthena AK, Korukonda RR, Gadde P. Evaluating the efficacy of different magnification variables during root planing procedure under a surgical operating microscope in chronic periodontitis: A randomised clinical trial. Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology. 2020;24(1):32. [crossref] [PubMed]
36.
Cortellini P, Tonetti MS. Microsurgical approach to periodontal regeneration. Initial evaluation in a case cohort. J Periodontol. 2001;72(4):559-69. [crossref] [PubMed]
37.
Bittencourt S, Del Peloso Ribeiro É, Sallum EA, Nociti Jr FH, Casati MZ. Surgical microscope may enhance root coverage with subepithelial connective tissue graft: A randomised-controlled clinical trial. J Periodontol. 2012;83(6):721-30.[crossref] [PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2022/58670.17120

Date of Submission: Jun 25, 2022
Date of Peer Review: Jul 25, 2022
Date of Acceptance: Aug 24, 2022
Date of Publishing: Nov 01, 2022

Author declaration:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. Yes

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Jun 29, 2022
• Manual Googling: Aug 16, 2022
• iThenticate Software: Aug 23, 2022 (22%)

Etymology: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com