Laser Assisted Non-surgical Periodontal Therapy: A Double Blind, Randomized Clinical Trial

Everett, Joseph Dylan; Rossmann, Jeffrey A.; Kerns, David G.; Al‐Hashimi, Ibtisam

doi:10.2174/1874210601711010079

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…By screening titles and abstracts, 71 articles were reserved for full‐text reading and the rest was eliminated. After a detailed assessment of full text, 16 qualified articles remained for our meta‐analysis (Aykol et al., 2011 ; Dereci et al., 2016 ; Eltas & Orbak, 2012 ; Euzebio Alves et al., 2013 ; Everett et al., 2017 ; Gundogar et al., 2016 ; Magaz et al., 2016 ; Makhlouf et al., 2012 ; Rotundo et al., 2010 ; Saglam et al., 2014 ; Sanz‐Sanchez et al., 2015 ; Sezen et al., 2020 ; Ustun et al., 2014 , 2018 ; Zengin Celik et al., 2019 ; Zhou et al., 2019 ). The flow diagram of the study selection is shown in Figure 1 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical and biochemical effect of laser as an adjunct to non‐surgical treatment of chronic periodontitis

Jiang

Feng

et al. 2021

Oral Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To evaluate the clinical and biochemical efficacy of laser therapy as an adjunct to non‐surgical treatment in chronic periodontitis. Methods A systematic search was performed through the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library for eligible articles published as of May 2, 2020, supplemented by information search in the System for Information on Programme Literature in Europe and a manual literature search. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) used to compare the adjunctive use of laser and non‐surgical treatment alone with an observation period of at least 6 months were included. Results Sixteen RCTs with a total of 525 subjects were included. Meta‐analysis suggested that the additional use of laser to scaling and root planing (SRP) showed significant superiority over SRP alone among most of clinical parameters involved. Regarding the GCF, although volume in the laser group was lower at week 4 and 12, no significant difference was found regarding the cytokines level. Subgroup analysis revealed that the combined therapy produced no significant difference in PD, CAL and PI at most time points for studies in respect to smokers. No treatment‐related adverse events had been reported in the included studies. Conclusions Pooled analysis suggested that laser‐assisted non‐surgical treatment improved clinical outcome to SRP alone in the management of non‐smoking chronic periodontitis patients.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical and biochemical effect of laser as an adjunct to non‐surgical treatment of chronic periodontitis

Jiang

Feng

et al. 2021

Oral Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Laser therapy effective in periodontal treatment and there is ongoing debate regarding the efficacy of lasers in periodontal disease. [50][51][52][53] The American Dental Association's (ADA) and American Academy of Periodontology's (AAP) recommendations regarding their use in treating periodontal disease. 54 Since the role of periodontal pathogens in the etiology of peri-implantitis is indisputable, this indicates that anti-infection therapy for periimplantitis should be consistent with the treatment strategy for periodontitis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surgical Regenerative Treatment in Combination with Magnetic Laser Supportive Therapy of Peri-Implantitis

Hakobyan

Seyranyan

Yessayan

et al. 2022

JBSMFS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The objective this study is to evaluate the potential of magnetic-lazer therapy as a supportive treatment of peri-implantitis. Materials and Methods: The 34 patients suffering from Peri-Implantitis were selected for this study. The patients randomly divided into two groups; 18 patients first group received surgical conventional treatment,16 patients second group received surgical conventional treatment and magnetic-lazer application. A total of 46 implants were treated with moderate peri-implantitis. Diagnostic parameters used to evaluate peri-implantitis include clinical indicators, Probing Pocket Depth (PPD), Bleeding On Probing (BOP), Marginal Bone Level (MBL) suppuration, mobility. Clinical and radiographical parameters were recorded before treatment (baseline) and at 3, 6 and 12, 36 months after therapy. Results: Reduction PPD and BOP was observed in comparison with basic clinical measurements. The mean BOP in 34 patients before treatment of peri-implantitis was 2.5 ± 0.31, after treatment, the first group of patients had mean 0.6 ± 0.1, the second group had mean 0.4 ± 0.12. The mean PPD in patients before treatment of peri-implantitis was 5,2±0,24, after treatment, the first group of patients had mean 3,9±0,28, the second group had mean 3,2±0,17. The mean MBL concomitant bone level gain averaged was 1, 54 mm in first group and 2.35 mm in second group. Stable clinical measurements PPD and BOP were demonstrated during the following 1,3 years. Conclusion: Surgical regenerative treatment combined with magnetic-laser supportive therapy reliable method for treatment peri-implantitis and may be considered an adjunct to the conventional surgical treatments of peri-implantitis

show abstract

“…The reduction in BOP was 42% at the test site and 37% at the control site. In another study [ 54 ], for all sites having PD of 5.0 mm or higher after three months, the PD decrease was 1.73 mm (1.50 mm CAL gain) in the test site and 1.58 mm (1.21 mm CAL gain) in the control site. In contrast, the PD decrease was 2.02 mm (1.83 mm CAL gain) at the test site and 1.42 mm (1.44 mm CAL gain) at the control site for all sites with PD of 5.0 mm or above at six months.…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Similarly, Everett JD and colleagues [ 54 ] conducted a split-mouth study to investigate the benefits of adding CO2 laser (1st pass: 25-50 J/cm2 at 4 watts CW and 2nd pass: 75-100 J/cm2 at 8 watts CW) treatment for sulcular decontamination to SRP in the management of chronic periodontitis. The research involved 173 teeth from 14 participants.…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laser Therapy Versus Traditional Scaling and Root Planing: A Comparative Review

Altalhi,

AlNajdi,

Al-Harbi

et al. 2024

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scaling and root planing (SRP) removes bacterial plaque, calculus, and associated microorganisms from the surface of the tooth and the surrounding soft tissue. While complete eradication of pathogenic microbes is impossible, gross removal can lower the microbial load, which in turn reduces inflammation and contributes to positive clinical outcomes. Instrumentation in limited-access anatomic areas like furcation, grooves, deep pockets, concavities, and distal molar areas is technically demanding with traditional mechanical debridement. However, emerging advanced systems such as lasers with bactericidal and detoxification effects offer the benefit of reaching limited-access areas that traditional SRP cannot reach. A digitized search was done on PubMed, Embase, Medline, and Google Scholar using the keywords “lasers”, “periodontal therapy”, “scaling”, and “root planing”. Upon screening and reviewing, the shortlisted articles comprised narrative reviews, systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, comparative studies, split-mouth studies, case series, and reports of non-surgical laser therapy and lasers as an adjunct to SRP. This review presents a comprehensive comparative evaluation of different laser modalities utilized in non-surgical periodontal treatment in contrast to standard SRP, rather than an exhaustive article review. It delves into the history and development of lasers, highlighting key advancements made in the realm of periodontics and dental care. This review includes an elucidation of the theory behind laser operation, along with an exploration of its intrinsic characteristics and breakdown of the various types of lasers that are currently available, and an examination of existing literature in both present and historical contexts regarding the comparison of various types of lasers with traditional periodontal treatment.

show abstract

Laser Assisted Non-surgical Periodontal Therapy: A Double Blind, Randomized Clinical Trial

Cited by 8 publications

References 26 publications

Clinical and biochemical effect of laser as an adjunct to non‐surgical treatment of chronic periodontitis

Clinical and biochemical effect of laser as an adjunct to non‐surgical treatment of chronic periodontitis

Surgical Regenerative Treatment in Combination with Magnetic Laser Supportive Therapy of Peri-Implantitis

Laser Therapy Versus Traditional Scaling and Root Planing: A Comparative Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About