Purpose Orthodontic treatment can last between 2 and 3 years. These long treatment times can significantly decrease patient cooperation and yield adverse effects. This review aimed to evaluate the clinical effect of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) on the acceleration of orthodontic tooth movement. Materials and methods We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and EMBASE and included only studies evaluating the effect of LLLT on orthodontic human tooth movement, according to inclusion criteria. Results We included thirteen studies (three controlled clinical trials [CCTs], five randomized clinical trials [RCTs], and five systematic reviews or meta-analyses). Six of the eight clinical trials showed a statistically significant effect on orthodontic tooth movement toward a low-level laser application. Conclusion Comparison between studies is difficult because of parameter variability (anchorage, orthodontic appliances, wavelength, and other laser parameters); however, LLLT may be an interesting method to accelerate orthodontic tooth movement. The highest-level studies show that LLLT can accelerate orthodontic movements, but other research must be pursued. This review of the literature seems to suggest concentrating future research regarding the relationship between LLLT and orthodontic tooth movement on wavelengths in infrared radiation approximately 780-810 nm, with a fluence of approximately 5 J/cm 2 .
This prospective randomized clinical trial aimed to evaluate the effect of low-level laser therapy on tooth movement during Class II intermaxillary elastics treatment. Forty-two patients with Class II malocclusion were included, and their maxillary quadrants were allocated into two groups: treatment with an active diode laser and a placebo group. In each group, the time taken to obtain Class I occlusion after 6 months, rate of movement, total displacement of the maxillary canine to Class I occlusion and pain were recorded. The time to reach Class I occlusion in the active laser group (2.46 ± 2.1 months) was not significantly different from that in the placebo group (2.48 ± 2.0 months) (p = 0.938). Interestingly, the total distance of movement on the active laser side (2.27 ± 1.5 mm) was significantly greater than that on the placebo side (1.64 ± 1.3 mm) (p = 0.009). The pain levels on days 1, 2 and 3 were not significantly different between the laser and placebo sections. The rate of distance change toward Class I occlusion in the laser group (1.1 ± 0.7 mm/month) was significantly higher than that in the placebo group (0.74 ± 0.6 mm/month) (p = 0.037). Low-level laser therapy (970 nm) did not reduce the time needed to obtain Class I occlusion, but a significant acceleration in tooth movement was observed in the irradiated group.Trial registration: NCT02181439. Registered 04 July 2014—https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?term=cinelaser.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.