Background: The combination of Amoxicillin and metronidazole (AMX/MET) as an adjunctive treatment to scaling root planing (SRP) has been proposed for the treatment of chronic periodontitis; however, its effectiveness and clinical safety remain to be defined. The purpose of the present meta‐analysis is to assess the effectiveness of SRP + AMX/MET compared to SRP alone.Methods: An electronic search of eight databases from their earliest records through October 8, 2011 and a hand search of international dental journals for the last 15 years were conducted. Gain in clinical attachment level (CAL), reduction in probing depth (PD), secondary outcomes, and adverse events were analyzed. A random‐effect model was used to pool the extracted data. The weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated for continuous outcomes; heterogeneity was assessed with the Cochrane χ² and I² tests. The level of significance was set at P <0.05.Results: After the selection process, four randomized clinical trials were included. Results of the meta‐analysis showed significant CAL gain (WMD = 0.21; 95% CI = 0.02 to 0.4; P <0.05) and PD reduction (WMD = 0.43; 95% CI = 0.24 to 0.63; P 0.05) or suppuration (WMD = 1.77; 95% CI = −1.7 to 5.24; P >0.05).Conclusion: The findings of this meta‐analysis seem to support the effectiveness of SRP + AMX/MET; however, future studies are needed to confirm these results.

Background: It was recently suggested that scaling and root planing (SRP) may help to improve glycemic and metabolic control in patients with chronic periodontitis (CP) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2); however, the effectiveness of SRP in this role remains unclear. This meta‐analysis assesses the effectiveness of SRP in improving glycemic and metabolic control in patients with CP and DM2.Methods: A literature search of electronic databases was performed for articles published through May 16, 2012, followed by a manual search of several dental journals. A meta‐analysis was conducted according to the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA). Weighted mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), total cholesterol (TC), triglycerides (TG), and high‐ and low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL and LDL, respectively). All outcomes were evaluated as changes from baseline to the end of follow‐up. Heterogeneity was assessed with the χ²‐based Cochran Q test and I² statistic. The level of significance was set at P <0.05.Results: After the study selection process, five randomized clinical trials were included. Results of the meta‐analysis indicated that SRP was effective in the reduction of HbA1c (MD = 0.65; 95% CI 0.43 to 0.88; P <0.05) and FPG (MD = 9.04; 95% CI 2.17 to 15.9; P <0.05), but no significant differences were found in the reduction of TC, TG, HDL, or LDL. No evidence of heterogeneity was detected.Conclusion: The meta‐analysis results seem to support the effectiveness of SRP in the improvement of glycemic control in patients with CP and DM2; however, future studies are needed to confirm these results.

Background: The systemic use of combined amoxicillin and metronidazole (AMX/MET) as an adjunctive treatment to full‐mouth scaling and root planing (FMSRP) has been proposed for the treatment of generalized aggressive periodontitis; however, its effectiveness and clinical safety remain to be defined. The purpose of the present meta‐analysis is to assess the effectiveness of FMSRP + AMX/MET compared to FMSRP alone.Methods: An electronic search of eight databases and a hand‐search of 10 international dental journals were conducted through September 11, 2011. Gain in clinical attachment level (CAL), reduction in probing depth (PD), secondary outcomes, and adverse events were analyzed. A random‐effect model was used to pool the extracted data. The weighted mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated for continuous outcomes, whereas risk difference (RD) with 95% CI was used for dichotomous data; heterogeneity was assessed with the χ²‐based Cochran Q test and I² statistic. The level of significance was set at P <0.05.Results: After the selection process, six randomized clinical trials were included. Results of the meta‐analysis showed significant CAL gain (MD, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.61; P <0.05) and PD reduction (MD, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.77; P 0.05).Conclusion: The findings of the meta‐analysis seem to support the effectiveness and the clinical safety of FMSRP + AMX/MET; however, future studies are needed to confirm these results.