Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 May;19(2):482-492.
doi: 10.1055/s-0044-1791221. Epub 2024 Nov 7.

Clinical Comparison of Guided Biofilm Therapy and Scaling and Root Planing in the Active Phase of Periodontitis Management

Magda Mensi  1   2 , Annamaria Sordillo  1 , Silvia Marchetti  1   2 , Stefano Calza  3 , Eleonora Scotti  1   2
Affiliations

Clinical Comparison of Guided Biofilm Therapy and Scaling and Root Planing in the Active Phase of Periodontitis Management

Magda Mensi et al. Eur J Dent. 2025 May.

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this randomized, controlled, split-mouth study was to compare full-mouth air polishing followed by ultrasonic debridement (known as Guided Biofilm Therapy [GBT]) versus traditional Scaling and Root Planing (SRP), in terms of pocket closure in patients with stages III and IV periodontitis.

Materials and methods: The patients underwent periodontal therapy in two sessions. At the beginning of the first session, quadrants I and IV and II and III were randomly assigned to GBT or SRP treatment. Periodontal parameters were collected at baseline, 6 weeks (T1), and 3 months (T2) after therapy. The primary outcome was the number of experimental sites (pocket probing depth [PPD] >4 and <10 mm) becoming closed pockets (PPD ≤ 4 mm bleeding on probing [BOP] negative) at T1 and T2. Secondary outcomes were PPD, recession, clinical attachment level, BOP, and plaque index variations at the experimental sites and treatment time.

Statistical analysis: A 10% difference in the primary outcome between the two protocols was set as the threshold to define inferiority/noninferiority of the test treatment. The primary outcome was modeled using a generalized estimating equation model to account for intrapatient measurement correlation. The estimates are reported as differences between groups' percentages (treatments or time points) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI). All analyses assumed a significance level of 5%.

Results: A total of 32 patients were selected. Mean PPD (mm) reduced from 6.23 (6.06-6.40) to 3.33 (3.06-3.61) at T2 for GBT, and from 6.21 (6.04-6.38) to 3.32 (3.11-3.53) at T2 for SRP. Both treatments reached a comparable percentage of closed pockets at T1 (77.9% for GBT vs. 80.1% for SRP, p = 0.235) and T2 (84.1% for GBT vs. 84.4% for SRP, p = 0.878), with no statistically or clinically significant difference. GBT and traditional SRP with ultrasonic and hand instruments reach satisfactory clinical results in the active treatment of patients with stages III and IV periodontitis, with comparable rates of closed pockets and treatment time.

Conclusion: GBT is a suitable option in the active phase of periodontitis management in patients with stages III and IV periodontitis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

M.M. and A.S. reported consulting fee, payment, and support received from EMS—Electro Medical Systems and E.S. reported payment received from EMS—Electro Medical Systems. All other authors reported no conflict of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Guided Biofilm Therapy protocol.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
CONSORT study flowchart. BOP, bleeding on probing; CAL, clinical attachment loss; PI, plaque index; PPD, pocket probing depth; REC, recession.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Goodson J M, Haffajee A D, Socransky S S et al.Control of periodontal infections: a randomized controlled trial I. The primary outcome attachment gain and pocket depth reduction at treated sites. J Clin Periodontol. 2012;39(06):526–536. - PubMed
    1. Chapple I LC, Dommisch H, Glogauer M et al.Periodontal health and gingival diseases and conditions on an intact and a reduced periodontium: consensus report of workgroup 1 of the 2017 World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases and Conditions. J Periodontol. 2018;89 01:S74–S84. - PubMed
    1. Ciantar M. Time to shift: from scaling and root planing to root surface debridement. Prim Dent J. 2014;3(03):38–42. - PubMed
    1. Bozbay E, Dominici F, Gokbuget A Y et al.Preservation of root cementum: a comparative evaluation of power-driven versus hand instruments. Int J Dent Hyg. 2018;16(02):202–209. - PubMed
    1. Flemmig T F, Petersilka G J, Mehl A, Hickel R, Klaiber B. The effect of working parameters on root substance removal using a piezoelectric ultrasonic scaler in vitro. J Clin Periodontol. 1998;25(02):158–163. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources