Please activate JavaScript!
Please install Adobe Flash Player, click here for download
ePaper created 2015-06-04, 14:41:41 | version 1.38.0
The EuroPerio Congress has established itself as the world’s leading conference in periodontology and implant dentistry. EuroPerio8 will take place from 3 to 6 June 2015 at the ExCeL London international exhibition and convention centre.
business16 EUROPERIO London 2015–3 June Despitewellover30yearsinden- tistry, therestillexistsconsiderable confusion amongst the profession and understandably patients about interdentalcleaning.Thewho,how, when and what with, has as many answers as differences of opinion. With 50 years of heritage, TePe UK (Booth 40) knows exactly the meaning of interdental space. While the terms proximal and in- terdental are used interchange- ablybymanybutliterally,theprox- imal surface or embrasure site is this (Fig. 1) and not the ID space which is literally the space in be- tween the teeth (Fig. 2), the com- pany says. Toothbrushes then, can reach both the embrasure and the proximalsurfacesbutcannothope to reach the interdental space of the teeth when they are in the nor- malarchwithfullcontactofthead- jacent teeth meaning that tooth brushing alone will leave 40% of the tooth surfaces un-cleaned. The toothbrush argument al- ready dealt with, the confusion continues in regard to mouth- wash. Patient surveys have re- vealed that patients believe that their toothbrushes clean interden- tally as so does their mouthwash. Supragingivalplaquecontrolises- sential for the maintenance of oral health. Despite the many chemo- therapeutic agents available as mouthrinses, mechanical plaque removal is still the best method to achieve effective plaque control. This is in part owing to the lack of development of oral antimicro- bials with the effectiveness and substantivityofchlorhexidineglu- conate but without its adverse ef- fects of dental staining and calcu- lus formation.1 Toothbrushing alone is not ef- fective on interdental surfaces. Dental floss and interdental brushes are the effective tools for biofilm disruption in the ID space.2,3 If there is loss of attach- ment then an IDB is superior to floss in terms of plaque removal and reduction in BOP and pocket depths.4 Moreover, at the XI Euro- pean Workshop in Periodontology heldinMarchofthisyear,Europe’s leading periodontal specialists met and agreed wide ranging guidelines on the prevention of gumdisease.Oneofthemostsignif- icant of these is that he daily use of interdental brushes have proven efficacyinmaintaininggumhealth and are preferable to flossing wherever possible. According to to TePe, it is all about the space and dental profes- sionalsoweittotheirpatientstobe clearonwhatwemeanbyinterden- tal cleaning in the interdental space. The task of finding the right toolswithwhichthepatientisable ( and willing) to clean that ID space is quite another matter. However, there are plenty of effective high quality choices out there, we just need to ensure that we are clear about where we want them to clean, how, how often and what with, TePe says. 1 Iacono VJ, Aldredge WA, Lucks H, Schwartzstein S. Modern Supragingi- val Plaque Control. Int Dent J. 1998 Jun;48(3 Suppl 1):290–7. 2 Kiger RD, Nylund K, Feller RP. A com- parisonofproximalplaqueremovalus- ingflossandinterdentalbrushes.JClin Periodontol 1991; 18 681–684. 3 SlotDE,DorferCE,VanDerWeijdenGA. The efficacy of interdental brushes on plaque parameters of periodontal in- flammation. International Journal of Dental Hygiene. 2008; 6(4); 253–264. 4 SmuklerH,NagerMC,TolmiePC.Inter- proximal tooth morphology and its ef- fect on plaque removal. Quintessence International 1989; 20. AD 50 years of understanding that“It ISAllAboutThe Space” Fig. 1 Fig. 2 Periodontol 1991; 18681–684.