ANÁLISE COMPARATIVA DE DOIS PROTOCOLOS ADJUVANTES NO TRATAMENTO DA PERICORONARITE: ENSAIO CLÍNICO RANDOMIZADO

• Ano de defesa: 2024
• Autor(a) principal: GABRIELA DE OLIVEIRA BLANCO
• Orientador(a): Albert Schiaveto de Souza
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Fundação Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul
• País: Brasil
• Palavras-chave em Português: PERICORONARITE, ODONTOLOGIA, ENSAIO CLÍNICO
• Link de acesso: https://repositorio.ufms.br/handle/123456789/9464

Pericoronitis is characterized by inflammation of the soft tissues associated with the crown of a partially erupted tooth. Conventional treatment is based on local measures to control the inflammatory and infectious process, such as cleaning and irrigation of the region with antimicrobial solutions, such as polyvinylpyrrolidone-iodine (PVPI). The aim of this study was to evaluate two adjuvant protocols in the treatment of pericoronitis, using irrigation of the infected site with polyvinylpyrrolidone-iodine and antimicrobial photodynamic therapy in patients treated at the School of Dentistry of the Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul. Thirty-four participants were selected, randomly separated and allocated into three groups, where they received the protocol with irrigation of 10% PVPI, aPDT or saline 0.9%, all associated with analgesia with dipyrone sodium 500 mg/ml, every 6 hours, for two days, and mouthwash with chlorhexidine digluconate 0.12%, 10 ml, every 12 hours, for 7 days, 30 minutes after tooth brushing. Patients were reevaluated after 48 hours (T1) and 7 days (T2) of the intervention to collect data on the remission of signs and symptoms. There was no statistically significant difference in the comparison between the protocols regarding pain; however, all showed a significant reduction in pain levels. The measurement of CLO-AM edema (lateral corner of the eye to the angle of the mandible) was significantly lower at moments T1 and T2 in the group that received aPDT and in the control group when compared to T0 (initial moment, immediately before the protocols were performed). The measurement of T-CL edema (tragus to the labial commissure) showed a significant reduction at moments T1 and T2, regardless of the protocol used, in relation to T0. The measurement of T-S edema (tragus to symphysis) of the participants who received PVPI and aPDT was significantly lower at moments T1 and T2 when compared to T0. It can be concluded that both irrigation of the infected site with serum or PVPI, as well as the performance of aPDT, associated with drug therapy, were effective in reducing the pain levels of the participants evaluated. Regarding edema, the group that received aPDT had a significant decrease in all measures evaluated (CLO-AM, T-CL and T-S).