The PDT was an effective adjunctive treatment of induced periodontitis compared with SRP in dexamethasone-inhibited rats.

Antimicrobial photodynamic therapy was an effective adjunctive treatment to SRP for induced periodontitis in nicotine-modified rats.

Within the limits of this study, it can be concluded that the restorative materials used exhibit biocompatibility; however, both materials interfered with the development of new bone and the connective tissue attachment process.

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to compare subgingival irrigation with tetracycline hydrochloride (TTC-HCL) as adjunctive treatment to scaling and root planning (SRP) on induced periodontitis in rats. Material and methodsIn 60 rats, periodontal disease was ligature-induced at the mandibular left first molar. After 7 days, the ligature was removed and all animals were submitted to SRP, and divided into 2 groups according to the following treatment: C (n=30) - subgingival irrigation with 1 mL of saline; T (n=30) - subgingival irrigation with 1 mL of TTC-HCL (50 mg/mL). Ten animals in each group were euthanized at 7, 15 and 30 days posttreatment. The histometric values were statistically analyzed (p<0.05). ResultsIn the histometric analysis, at 7, 15 and 30 days, Group T (0.72±0.05 mm2, 0.57±0.14 mm2, 0.62±0.07 mm2), showed less bone loss (p<0.05) than Group C (1.35±0.25 mm2; 1.40±0.31 mm2; 1.29±0.27 mm2), respectively. ConclusionsSubgingival irrigation with TTC-HCL was an effective adjunctive treatment for periodontal disease induced in rats.

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to assess radiographically the effect of photodynamic therapy (PDT) as an adjunctive treatment to scaling and root planing (SRP) on induced periodontitis in dexamethasone-induced immunosuppressed rats.Material and MethodsThe animals were divided into 2 groups: ND group (n=60): saline treatment; D group (n=60): dexamethasone treatment. In both ND and D groups, periodontal disease was induced by the placement of a ligature in the left first mandibular molar. After 7 days, ligature was removed and all animals received SRP, being divided according to the following treatments: SRP: saline and PDT: phenothiazinium dye (TBO) plus laser irradiation. Ten animals per treatment were killed at 7, 15 and 30 days. The distance between the cementoenamel junction and the height of the alveolar bone crest in the mesial surface of the mandibular left first molars was determined in millimeters in each radiograph. The radiographic values were analyzed statistically by ANOVA and Tukey's test at a p value <0.05.ResultsIntragroup radiographic assessment (ND and D groups) showed that there was statistically significant less bone loss in the animals treated with PDT in all experimental periods compared to those submitted to SRP. Intergroup radiographic analysis (ND and D groups) demonstrated that there was greater bone loss in the ND group treated with SRP compared to the D group treated with PDT at 7 and 30 days.ConclusionPDT was an effective adjunctive treatment to SRP on induced periodontitis in dexamethasone-induced immunosuppressed rats.

The aim of this study was to compare low-level laser therapy (LLLT) as adjuvant treatment for induced periodontitis with scaling and root planing (SRP) in dexamethasone-treated rats. One-hundred twenty rats were divided into groups: D group (n = 60), treated with dexamethasone; ND group (n = 60) treated with saline solution. In both groups, periodontal disease was induced by ligature at the left first mandibular molar. After 7 days, the ligature was removed and all animals were subjected to SRP and were divided according to the following treatments: SRP, irrigation with saline solution (SS); SRP + LLLT, SS and laser irradiation (660 nm; 24 J; 0.428 W/cm(2)). Ten animals in each treatment were killed after 7 days, 15 days and 30 days. The radiographic and histometric values were statistically analyzed. In all groups radiographic and histometric analysis showed less bone loss (P < 0.05) in animals treated with SRP + LLLT in all experimental periods. SRP + LLLT was an effective adjuvant conventional treatment for periodontitis in rats treated with dexamethasone.

Background: Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) has been suggested to improve primary stability at the early stages of osseointegration in animal models. However, there is still scarce evidence about its influence on implant stability in humans. Purpose: To assess the influence of LLLT on implant stability in implants placed in fresh extraction sockets. Material and methods: A randomized controlled trial was designed according to the SPIRIT guidelines and is reported following the CONSORT. Patients were randomly allocated according to control or LLLT groups. LLLT consisted in the application of GaAlAs laser (808 nm, avg. power density: 50 mW, circular spot diameter and area: 0.71 cm/0.4cm 2) applied in six points in contact mode with peri-implant soft tissue (1.23 minutes in each point of application; dose per point 11 J) before bone perforation and after suturing. The total dose resulted in 66 J per application moment. This LLLT protocol was applied only in the dental implant placement session. Implant stability was by ISQ at implant placement (T 0) and the abutment selection (T a). Digital radiographs for T 0 and T a were used to assess the distance between the implant platform and alveolar bone crest, in millimeters. T-test and Shapiro-Wilk test were used to analyze data between groups using the implant as a unit of analysis. Results: Fifty implants were placed in 44 patients. The insertion torque ranged from 15 to 60 N.cm (mean 35.64 ± 13.34). Two implants of the LLLT and one of the control groups were lost to follow-up and one implant of the control group failed to osseointegrate (4.3%). ISQ at T 0 ranged from 17 to 79 (mean 59.33 ± 13.05) and from 40 to 89 (mean 66.46 SD ± 11.56) at T a. No differences were observed when comparing the groups with ISQ difference (P = .433) or radiographical peri-implant alterations (P = .261). Conclusions: LLLT did not influence implant stability in implants placed in fresh extraction sockets when assessed at healing abutment installation.

No abstract