Role of mechanical curettage with and without adjunct antimicrobial photodynamic therapy in the treatment of peri-implant mucositis in cigarette smokers: A randomized controlled clinical trial

Adjunctive antimicrobial photodynamic therapy for treating periodontal and peri-implant diseases

BACKGROUND

Periodontitis and peri-implant diseases are chronic inflammatory conditions occurring in the mouth. Left untreated, periodontitis progressively destroys the tooth-supporting apparatus. Peri-implant diseases occur in tissues around dental implants and are characterised by inflammation in the peri-implant mucosa and subsequent progressive loss of supporting bone. Treatment aims to clean the pockets around teeth or dental implants and prevent damage to surrounding soft tissue and bone, including improvement of oral hygiene, risk factor control (e.g. encouraging cessation of smoking) and surgical interventions. The key aspect of standard non-surgical treatment is the removal of the subgingival biofilm using subgingival instrumentation (SI) (also called scaling and root planing). Antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) can be used an adjunctive treatment to SI. It uses light energy to kill micro-organisms that have been treated with a light-absorbing photosensitising agent immediately prior to aPDT.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of SI with adjunctive aPDT versus SI alone or with placebo aPDT for periodontitis and peri-implant diseases in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two other databases and two trials registers up to 14 February 2024.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (both parallel-group and split-mouth design) in participants with a clinical diagnosis of periodontitis, peri-implantitis or peri-implant disease. We compared the adjunctive use of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT), in which aPDT was given after subgingival or submucosal instrumentation (SI), versus SI alone or a combination of SI and a placebo aPDT given during the active or supportive phase of therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures, and we used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. We prioritised six outcomes and the measure of change from baseline to six months after treatment: probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP), clinical attachment level (CAL), gingival recession (REC), pocket closure and adverse effects related to aPDT. We were also interested in change in bone level (for participants with peri-implantitis), and participant satisfaction and quality of life.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 50 RCTs with 1407 participants. Most studies used a split-mouth study design; only 18 studies used a parallel-group design. Studies were small, ranging from 10 participants to 88. Adjunctive aPDT was given in a single session in 39 studies, in multiple sessions (between two and four sessions) in 11 studies, and one study included both single and multiple sessions. SI was given using hand or power-driven instrumentation (or both), and was carried out prior to adjunctive aPDT. Five studies used placebo aPDT in the control group and we combined these in meta-analyses with studies in which SI alone was used. All studies included high or unclear risks of bias, such as selection bias or performance bias of personnel (when SI was carried out by an operator aware of group allocation). We downgraded the certainty of all the evidence owing to these risks of bias, as well as for unexplained statistical inconsistency in the pooled effect estimates or for imprecision when evidence was derived from very few participants and confidence intervals (CI) indicated possible benefit to both intervention and control groups. Adjunctive aPDT versus SI alone during active treatment of periodontitis (44 studies) We are very uncertain whether adjunctive aPDT during active treatment of periodontitis leads to improvement in any clinical outcomes at six months when compared to SI alone: PPD (mean difference (MD) 0.52 mm, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.74; 15 studies, 452 participants), BOP (MD 5.72%, 95% CI 1.62 to 9.81; 5 studies, 171 studies), CAL (MD 0.44 mm, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.64; 13 studies, 414 participants) and REC (MD 0.00, 95% CI -0.16 to 0.16; 4 studies, 95 participants); very low-certainty evidence. Any apparent differences between adjunctive aPDT and SI alone were not judged to be clinically important. Twenty-four studies (639 participants) observed no adverse effects related to aPDT (moderate-certainty evidence). No studies reported pocket closure at six months, participant satisfaction or quality of life. Adjunctive aPDT versus SI alone during supportive treatment of periodontitis (six studies) We were very uncertain whether adjunctive aPDT during supportive treatment of periodontitis leads to improvement in any clinical outcomes at six months when compared to SI alone: PPD (MD -0.04 mm, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.10; 3 studies, 125 participants), BOP (MD 4.98%, 95% CI -2.51 to 12.46; 3 studies, 127 participants), CAL (MD 0.07 mm, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.40; 2 studies, 85 participants) and REC (MD -0.20 mm, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.08; 1 study, 24 participants); very low-certainty evidence. These findings were all imprecise and included no clinically important benefits for aPDT. Three studies (134 participants) reported adverse effects: a single participant developed an abscess, though it is not evident whether this was related to aPDT, and two studies observed no adverse effects related to aPDT (moderate-certainty evidence). No studies reported pocket closure at six months, participant satisfaction or quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Because the certainty of the evidence is very low, we cannot be sure if adjunctive aPDT leads to improved clinical outcomes during the active or supportive treatment of periodontitis; moreover, results suggest that any improvements may be too small to be clinically important. The certainty of this evidence can only be increased by the inclusion of large, well-conducted RCTs that are appropriately analysed to account for change in outcome over time or within-participant split-mouth study designs (or both). We found no studies including people with peri-implantitis, and only one study including people with peri-implant mucositis, but this very small study reported no data at six months, warranting more evidence for adjunctive aPDT in this population group.

Efficacy of adjunctive photodynamic therapy to conventional mechanical debridement for peri-implant mucositis

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis was conducted to assess the effectiveness of photodynamic therapy (PDT) as an adjunct to conventional mechanical debridement (CMD) for the management of peri-implant mucositis (p-iM).

METHODS

We systematically searched four databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating PDT + CMD for p-iM from their inception to March 13, 2023. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis revealed that PDT + CMD treatment was more effective than CMD alone in reducing probing depth (PD) (Mean Difference [MD]: -1.09, 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: -1.99 to -0.2, P = 0.02) and plaque index (PI) (MD: -2.06, 95% CI: -2.81 to -1.31, P < 0.00001). However, there was no statistically significant difference in the improvement of bleeding on probing (BOP) between the PDT + CMD groups and CMD groups (MD: -0.97, 95% CI: -2.81 to 0.88, P = 0.31).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current available evidence, this meta-analysis indicates that the addition of PDT to CMD significantly improves PD and PI compared to CMD alone in the treatment of p-iM. However, there is no significant difference in improving BOP.

The impact of electronic cigarettes on peri-implant health: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Recent literature suggests that the use of electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) is a substantial contributing factor to the unsuccessful outcomes of dental implant procedures. Our aim was to systematically review the effect of e-cigarette use on clinical (PI, PD, BOP), radiographic (bone loss), and immunologic (IL-1β) peri‑implant parameters.

DATA

Main search terms used in combination: electronic cigarette, peri‑implantitis, vaping.

SOURCES

An electronic search was undertaken for MEDLINE, EMBASE, COCHRANE, and SCOPUS databases between 2017 and 2023.

STUDY SELECTION

The study protocol was developed according to PRISMA guidelines, and the focus question was formulated according to the PICO strategy. No restriction was accepted regarding language or year to avoid selection bias; the initial database search yielded 49 publications. Following the selection process, only seven studies met the inclusion criteria. Seven studies were statistically analyzed via MedCalc program. A pooled effect was deemed statistically significant if the p-value was less than 0.05.

CONCLUSION

Electronic cigarettes cause an increase in probing depth, bone loss, and the level of IL-1β, one of the bone destruction mediators in the tissues around the implant, and a decrease in bleeding on probing.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

E-cigarette is a potential risk factor for the healing process and the results of implant treatment, similar to cigarettes. Performing clinical research to evaluate the e-cigarette effect on peri‑implantitis in an age and gender-match population is needed.

Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Adjunctive Phototherapy Versus Antibiotic Therapy Against Peri-Implant Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Peri-implantitis, an inflammatory condition in implant tissues, requires bacterial eradication and implant surface decontamination, with aPDT as a helpful surgical adjunct. Objective:This project was designed to investigate the effect of antibiotic therapy versus aPDT, as adjuncts to conventional mechanical debridement (MD), on the peri-implant clinical and/or radiographic parameters among patients with peri-implant diseases. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted across electronic databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, up to and including April 2023, without any restriction on the language and year of publication, focusing the following research question: "Does adjunctive aPDT improve the peri-implant clinical and/or radiographic parameters in treating peri-implant diseases compared to antibiotic therapy?" Statistical analysis was performed on peri-implant clinical [plaque index (PI), probing depth (PD), and bleeding on probing (BOP)] and radiographic parameters [marginal bone loss (MBL)]. The study included six randomized controlled trials and one clinical (nonrandomized) study. Results: The systematic review findings indicate that the application of aPDT as an adjunct to MD is equally effective as adjunctive antibiotic therapy in improving peri-implant clinical parameters and radiographic parameters in patients with peri-implant diseases. Only two studies were classified as having a low risk of bias (RoB), two were assessed as having an unclear RoB, and the remaining three studies were determined to have a high RoB. However, the meta-analysis results revealed no statistically significant difference in peri-implant PI, PD, and MBL scores between patients treated with adjunct aPDT or adjunct antibiotic therapy. Notably, there was a statistically significant difference favoring adjunct aPDT in peri-implant BOP values compared to the control group. Conclusions: Despite the limited number of included studies and the significant heterogeneity among them, the findings suggest that aPDT yields comparable peri-implant clinical and radiographic outcomes to adjunctive antibiotic therapy, as adjuncts to MD, for the potential treatment of peri-implant diseases.

The Efficacy of Ten Different Adjunctive Measures in Patients with Nonsurgically Treated Peri-Implant Disease: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of 10 adjunctive measures on non-surgical therapy outcomes for peri-implant disease. Methods: We formulated the study question and keywords following the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome framework. Randomized controlled trials were identified through searches in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science. Two researchers assessed the quality of included literature according to the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Data analysis and ranking were performed using Stata 15.0 software. Results: This study, involving 51 pieces of literature and 2660 samples, conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA), which revealed that photodynamic therapy (PDT) significantly reduced probing pocket depth values in patients with peri-implant mucositis (SUCRA = 96.3%) and peri-implantitis (SUCRA = 96.7%). In addition, it showed an improvement in bleeding on probing (BOP) values for peri-implantitis (SUCRA = 91.6%). Furthermore, diode lasers improved BOP values for peri-implant mucositis (SUCRA = 76.5%). Conclusions: According to the NMA results and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), PDT and diode laser outperform other adjuncts in peri-implant disease.

Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Adjunctive Photodynamic Therapy for Treating Peri-Implant Mucositis Among Cigarette Smokers and Diabetics: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective: This systematic review aimed to assess the influence of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) as an adjunct to mechanical debridement (MD) on peri-implant clinical and radiographic outcomes among cigarette smokers and diabetics with peri-implant mucositis (piM). Methods: Randomized controlled trials, assessing the clinical and radiographic parameters of aPDT versus MD alone among smokers and diabetics with piM, were included in the study. Meta-analyses were conducted to calculate the standard mean difference with a 95% confidence interval. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed utilizing the modified Jadad quality scale. Results: The meta-analyses found statistically significant differences between the impact of adjunct aPDT and MD alone on the peri-implant plaque index (PI), probing depth (PD), and bleeding on probing among smokers and diabetics with piM at the final follow-up visit. However, no significant differences were found between the impact of adjunct aPDT and MD alone on the peri-implant crestal bone loss among smokers and diabetics with piM at the final follow-up. Conclusions: The application of aPDT as an adjunctive to MD demonstrated improved scores of the peri-implant clinical parameters among smokers and diabetics with piM in comparison with MD alone.

Antimicrobial photodynamic therapy against oral biofilm: influencing factors, mechanisms, and combined actions with other strategies

Oral biofilms are a prominent cause of a wide variety of oral infectious diseases which are still considered as growing public health problems worldwide. Oral biofilms harbor specific virulence factors that would aggravate the infectious process and present resistance to some traditional therapies. Antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) has been proposed as a potential approach to eliminate oral biofilms via in situ-generated reactive oxygen species. Although numerous types of research have investigated the effectiveness of aPDT, few review articles have listed the antimicrobial mechanisms of aPDT on oral biofilms and new methods to improve the efficiency of aPDT. The review aims to summarize the virulence factors of oral biofilms, the progress of aPDT in various oral biofilm elimination, the mechanism mediated by aPDT, and combinatorial approaches of aPDT with other traditional agents.

Efficacy of indocyanine green and methylene blue mediated-photodynamic therapy on peri-implant outcomes among diabetics with peri-implant mucositis

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to assess the efficacy of indocyanine green (ICG)-mediated versus methylene blue (MB)-mediated photodynamic therapy (PDT) as an adjunct to conventional mechanical debridement (MD) on the peri‑implant clinical, radiographic, microbiological, and immunological outcomes among diabetics with peri‑implant mucositis (pi-M).

METHODS

For this 3-month follow-up study, diabetics having pi-M were randomly divided into 3 groups: group-I (n = 20) subjects received only MD; group-II (n = 20) participants received ICG-mediated adjunct PDT; and group-III (n = 20) subjects received MB-mediated adjunct PDT. Peri-implant clinical (i.e., plaque index [PI], bleeding on probing [BOP], probing depth [PD]), radiographic (crestal bone loss [CBL]), microbiological (Fusobacterium nucleatum [F. nucleatum], Tannerella forsythia [T. forsythia], Prevotella intermedia [P. intermedia], Porphyromonas gingivalis [P. gingivalis], Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans [A. actinomycetemcomitans]), and immunological (interleukin [IL]-6, IL-1β, tumor necrosis factor-alpha [TNF-α]) outcomes were assessed at baseline and 3-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Mean changes between baseline and 3-month follow-up in peri‑implant clinico-radiographic parameters were significantly different between control (PI: 12.42±21.80%; BOP: 12.10±19.30%; PD: 0.45±0.41 mm; CBL: 1.10±1.02 mm) and test groups (ICG-mediated PDT [PI: 26.55±25.80%; BOP: 28.77±29.24%; PD: 0.84±0.62 mm; CBL: 1.98±1.85 mm] and MB-mediated PDT [PI: 27.24±26.15%; BOP: 27.71±28.16%; PD: 0.85±0.63 mm; CBL: 1.95±1.80 mm]), however comparable differences were observed in peri‑implant PI, BOP, PD, and CBL between group-II and group-III participants (p>0.05). The proportions of T. forsythia were significantly reduced in group-II (4.78 × 10⁴ colony-forming unit per milliliter [CFU/mL]) and group-III (4.76 × 10⁴ CFU/mL) as compared to group-I (-4.40 × 10³ CFU/mL) at 3-month follow-up (p = 0.02). No statistically significant differences were observed between the study groups regarding the proportions of the other assessed target bacterial species. For IL-6 (group-I: 210±108; group-II: 298±165; group-III: 277±121 pg/mL; p = 0.03), IL-1β (group-I: 101±95; group-II: 84±98; group-III: 86±74 pg/mL; p = 0.02), and TNF-α (group-I: 336±121; group-II: 385±210; group-III: 366±198 pg/mL; p = 0.03) peri‑implant sulcular fluid [PISF] levels, all three study groups demonstrated statistically significant reduction at 3-month follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

ICG-mediated and MB-mediated adjunctive PDT showed statistically significant improvements in peri‑implant clinical, radiographic, microbiological, and immunological parameters as compared to conventional MD alone at 3-month follow-up among diabetics with pi-M. However, comparable outcomes were demonstrated by ICG-mediated and MB-mediated adjunctive PDT regarding the assessed peri‑implant parameters.

Short-term influence of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy as an adjuvant to mechanical debridement in reducing soft-tissue inflammation and subgingival yeasts colonization in patients with peri-implant mucositis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this short-term follow-up study was to evaluate the influence of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) as an adjuvant to mechanical debridement (MD) in reducing soft-tissue inflammation and subgingival yeasts colonization (SYC) in patients with peri‑implant mucositis (PiM).

METHODS

Individuals diagnosed with PiM were included. Demographic data was collected using a questionnaire. Peri-implant plaque index (PI), bleeding index (BI), probing depth (PD), crestal bone levels and SYC were measured at baseline. Therapeutically, these individuals were divided into test and control groups. In the control-group patients underwent MD and in the test-group patients underwent MD with adjunct single session of aPDT. Clinical peri‑implant parameters and SYC were reassessed after 12-weeks. Correlation between age, gender and duration of implants with SYC and clinical peri‑implant status was assessed using logistic regression models. P < 0.05 was selected as an indicator of statistical significance.

RESULTS

The test and control-groups comprised of 24 and 23 individuals, respectively. In the test and control groups, toothbrushing twice daily was reported by 7 (29.2%) and 5 (21.7%) individuals, respectively. None of the individuals had ever used a dental floss. At baseline, there was no difference in peri‑implant PI, BI, PD and CBL in the test and control groups. At follow-up, peri‑implant PI (P < 0.01), BI (P < 0.01) and PD (P < 0.01) were significantly higher in the control compared with the test-group. At baseline, SYC in the test and control groups were 1865.3 ± 403.4 CFU/ml and 1963.7 ± 512.4 CFU/ml, respectively. At 90 days' follow-up, SYC in the test and control groups were 1472 ± 202.7 and 1538.4 ± 331.7 CFU/ml, respectively. There was no significant difference in SYC in both groups when baseline values were compared with 90 days' follow-up.

CONCLUSION

One session of aPDT after MC with adjunct aPDT is effective in reducing soft tissue inflammation but not SYC in patients with PiM.

Clinical applications of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy in dentistry

Given the emergence of resistant bacterial strains and novel microorganisms that globally threaten human life, moving toward new treatment modalities for microbial infections has become a priority more than ever. Antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) has been introduced as a promising and non-invasive local and adjuvant treatment in several oral infectious diseases. Its efficacy for elimination of bacterial, fungal, and viral infections and key pathogens such as Streptococcus mutans, Porphyromonas gingivalis, Candida albicans, and Enterococcus faecalis have been investigated by many invitro and clinical studies. Researchers have also investigated methods of increasing the efficacy of such treatment modalities by amazing developments in the production of natural, nano based, and targeted photosensitizers. As clinical studies have an important role in paving the way towards evidence-based applications in oral infection treatment by this method, the current review aimed to provide an overall view of potential clinical applications in this field and summarize the data of available randomized controlled clinical studies conducted on the applications of aPDT in dentistry and investigate its future horizons in the dental practice. Four databases including PubMed (Medline), Web of Science, Scopus and Embase were searched up to September 2022 to retrieve related clinical studies. There are several clinical studies reporting aPDT as an effective adjunctive treatment modality capable of reducing pathogenic bacterial loads in periodontal and peri-implant, and persistent endodontic infections. Clinical evidence also reveals a therapeutic potential for aPDT in prevention and reduction of cariogenic organisms and treatment of infections with fungal or viral origins, however, the number of randomized clinical studies in these groups are much less. Altogether, various photosensitizers have been used and it is still not possible to recommend specific irradiation parameters due to heterogenicity among studies. Reaching effective clinical protocols and parameters of this treatment is difficult and requires further high quality randomized controlled trials focusing on specific PS and irradiation parameters that have shown to have clinical efficacy and are able to reduce pathogenic bacterial loads with sufficient follow-up periods.

Effect of mechanical instrumentation with adjunct photodynamic therapy on salivary TNFα levels and clinical periodontal and peri‑implant status in patients with depression: A randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the present randomized controlled trial was to assess the effect of mechanical instrumentation (MI) with adjunct photodynamic therapy (PDT) on salivary tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNFα) levels and clinical periodontal and peri‑implant status in patients with depression.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In groups 1 and 2, individuals with periodontal and peri‑implant diseases with and without depression, respectively were included. Group-3 comprised of systemically healthy individuals with a healthy periodontal and peri‑implant status. In groups 1 and 2, patients in the test- and control groups received MI with and without PDT respectively. Periodontal and peri‑implant probing depth and plaque and gingival indices were measured. Radiographic evaluation was done at baseline. Whole salivary tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα) in peri‑implant sulcular fluid were measured at baseline. The clinical and immunological parameters were reassessed at 120 days' follow-up. Level of significance was set at P<0.05.

RESULTS

Thirty-four, 36 and 37 implants were in function in groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively. At baseline, periodontal and peri‑implant clinical parameters and TNFα levels were significantly higher in groups 1 (P<0.05) and 2 (P<0.05) than Group-3. At 4-months follow-up, there was no difference in periodontal and peri‑implant clinical parameters in the test- and control groups among individuals in groups 1 and 3. In Group-2, there was a significant reduction in periodontal (P<0.05) and peri‑implant (P<0.05) clinical parameters at 4-months follow-up than baseline. In Group-2, there was no significant difference in these parameters among patients in the test- and control-groups.

CONCLUSION

In patients with depression clinical periodontal and peri‑implant status is poorer and salivary TNFα levels are higher after MI with or without PDT. In healthy patients, PDT offers no additional benefits in the treatment of periodontal inflammation.

A comparative evaluation of lasers and photodynamic therapy in the nonsurgical treatment of peri-implant diseases: A Bayesian network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

We conducted this Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) to evaluate the safety and efficacy of different lasers and PDT compared to conventional mechanical debridement (CMD) for peri-implant treatment.

METHODS

The Web of Science, Cochrane Library and PubMed databases were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) assessing the clinical effectiveness of adjunctive PDT, different lasers, and CMD until January 1st, 2022. Clinical outcomes were the changes in pocket probing depth (PPD), marginal bone loss (MBL), and clinical attachment level (CAL).

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies, including 4 types of lasers, were included. Compared to that with CMD alone, PPD reduction was significantly more efficient in the diode laser (LD)+CMD groups (MD, 0.53; 95%CI, 0.13-0.93) and the PDT+CMD groups (MD, 0.83; 95%CI, 0.32-1.34) than in the CMD group in the follow-up period. Moreover, PDT+CMD treatment also showed a significantly better marginal bone level gain (MD, 0.32; 95%CI, 0.06-0.57). No significant effect on ΔCAL was observed among the different treatment strategies. Despite no differences in PPD reduction, MBL and CAL gains were found among the adjunctive laser treatment groups, PDT+CMD had the highest ranking probability of the most effective treatment in these clinical indices of periodontitis. The certainty of evidence for all outcomes was judged as very low to moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limits of this NMA, we found that adjunctive PDT achieved a small additional benefit on PPD reduction and MBL gain compared with CMD alone and had the highest probability of being ranked first on the changes in PPD, MBL and CAL. PDT+CMD may represent an alternative method for peri‑implant treatment. Further high-quality RCTs are needed to assess the influence of potential confounders on the efficacy of lasers and PDT.

The benefit of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy to mechanical debridement in the treatment of smokers with peri-implant diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) has been proposed as an adjunctive treatment strategy for peri-implant diseases. This systematic review aimed to determine whether aPDT as an adjunct to mechanical debridement has an additional benefit for smokers with peri-implant diseases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which evaluated the clinical outcomes of mechanical debridement alone versus mechanical debridement + aPDT among smokers, were considered eligible to be included. The primary outcome was bleeding on probing (BOP) and secondary outcomes included probing depth (PD), plaque index (PI), and crestal bone loss (CBL). Meta-analyses using a random-effects model were conducted to calculate the mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). The quality of evidence was assessed according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). A total of four RCTs (188 participants) were included. The aPDT group showed significantly improved PD (MD =  - 1.26, 95% CI =  - 2.19 to - 0.32, p = 0.008) and PI (MD =  - 10.6%, 95% CI =  - 14.46 to - 6.74%, p = 0.0001) compared with mechanical debridement group at 3-month follow-up. No significant difference in bleeding on probing (BOP) was observed at 3-month follow-up (MD =  - 0.60%, 95% CI =  - 2.36 to 1.16%, p = 0.50). The subgroup analyses on photosensitizers demonstrated significant differences between the two groups on PD (MD =  - 1.23, 95% CI =  - 2.41 to - 0.05, p = 0.04) and PI (MD =  - 12.33, 95% CI =  - 14.74 to - 9.92, p < 0.00001) by the use of methylene blue (MB). Within the limitation of this study, compared with mechanical debridement alone, combined use of aPDT was more effective in reducing PD and PI in smokers at 3-month follow-up. MB was a predictable photosensitizer for aPDT. However, the findings should be interpreted with caution due to the limited number of included studies, methodological deficiencies, and heterogeneity between studies.

Photodynamic Therapy for Peri-Implant Diseases

Peri-implant diseases are frequently presented in patients with dental implants. This category of inflammatory infections includes peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis that are primarily caused by the oral bacteria that colonize the implant and the supporting soft and hard tissues. Other factors also contribute to the pathogenesis of peri-implant diseases. Based on established microbial etiology, mechanical debridement has been the standard management approach for peri-implant diseases. To enhance the improvement of therapeutic outcomes, adjunctive treatment in the form of antibiotics, probiotics, lasers, etc. have been reported in the literature. Recently, the use of photodynamic therapy (PDT)/antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) centered on the premise that a photoactive substance offers benefits in the resolution of peri-implant diseases has gained attention. Herein, the reported role of PDT in peri-implant diseases, as well as existing observations and opinions regarding PDT, are discussed.

Efficacy of alternative or adjunctive measures to conventional non-surgical and surgical treatment of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

To evaluate the efficacy of alternative or adjunctive measures to conventional non-surgical or surgical treatment of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis.

Material and methods

Prospective randomized and nonrandomized controlled studies comparing alternative or adjunctive measures, and reporting on changes in bleeding scores (i.e., bleed0ing index (BI) or bleeding on probing (BOP)), probing depth (PD) values or suppuration (SUPP) were searched.

Results

Peri-implant mucositis: adjunctive use of local antiseptics lead to greater PD reduction (weighted mean difference (WMD) = − 0.23 mm; p = 0.03, respectively), whereas changes in BOP were comparable (WMD = − 5.30%; p = 0.29). Non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis: alternative measures for biofilm removal and systemic antibiotics yielded higher BOP reduction (WMD = − 28.09%; p = 0.01 and WMD = − 17.35%; p = 0.01, respectively). Surgical non-reconstructive peri-implantitis treatment: WMD in PD amounted to − 1.11 mm favoring adjunctive implantoplasty (p = 0.02). Adjunctive reconstructive measures lead to significantly higher radiographic bone defect fill/reduction (WMD = 56.46%; p = 0.01 and WMD = − 1.47 mm; p = 0.01), PD (− 0.51 mm; p = 0.01) and lower soft-tissue recession (WMD = − 0.63 mm; p = 0.01), while changes in BOP were not significant (WMD = − 11.11%; p = 0.11).

Conclusions

Alternative and adjunctive measures provided no beneficial effect in resolving peri-implant mucositis, while alternative measures were superior in reducing BOP values following non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis. Adjunctive reconstructive measures were beneficial regarding radiographic bone-defect fill/reduction, PD reduction and lower soft-tissue recession, although they did not improve the resolution of mucosal inflammation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40729-021-00388-x.

Effectiveness of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy as an adjunct to mechanical instrumentation in reducing counts of Enterococcus faecalis and Candida albicans from C-shaped root canals

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

The aim was to assess the effectiveness of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) as an adjunct to mechanical instrumentation (MI) in reducing Enterococcus faecalis (E faecalis) and Candida albicans (C albicans) counts from C-shaped root-canals.

METHODS

Teeth with C-shaped canals as identified on cone beam computed tomographic images were included. Following incubation with E faecalis and C albicans, samples were divided into 4 groups a four follows: Group-1: MI with adjunct aPDT; Group-2: aPDT alone; Group-3: MI alone; and Group-4: no treatment. The pulp chambers of these teeth were exposed and coronal pulp was mechanically derided using sterile endodontic excavators. Using flexible files, all canals were debrided up to size #30 K-files with intermittent irrigation with 2.5% sodium hypochlorite irrigation. In Groups 1 and 3, methylene-blue was injected in all canals and aPDT was performed using a 600 nm diode laser. Sample-size estimation was done on data from a pilot investigation and group-comparisons were done using one way analysis of variance and Bonferroni post-hoc adjustment tests. P < .05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Sixty periodontally hopeless mandibular second molars with C-shaped canals were included. There was a statistically significant reduction CFU/mL of E faecalis (P < .001) and C albicans (P < .001). At post-operative microbial assessments in Group-1. There was no difference CFU/mL of E faecalis and C albicans at post-operative microbial assessments in Groups 2-4.

CONCLUSION

MI with adjunct aPDT is more effective in reducing count of E faecalis and C albicans from C-shaped root canals.

Smoking a Dangerous Addiction: A Systematic Review on an Underrated Risk Factor for Oral Diseases

Despite growing knowledge of the adverse effects of cigarette smoking on general health, smoking is one of the most widely prevalent addictions around the world. Globally, about 1.1 billion smokers and over 8 million people die each year because of cigarette smoking. Smoking acts as a source for a variety of oral and systemic diseases. Various periodontal issues such as increased pocket depth, loss of alveolar bone, tooth mobility, oral lesions, ulcerations, halitosis, and stained teeth are more common among smokers. This systematic review was conducted according to the guidelines from PRISMA, and research articles were retrieved from the Web database sources on 31 May 2021. The quality of research articles was ensured by the type of evidence from combined schema incorporating as schema-13 evidence type description, Cochrane health promotion and public health field (CHPPHF), and the health gains notation framework-14 screening question for quality assessment of qualitative and quantitative studies. Smokers have been found to have bleeding on probing, periodontal pockets, and clinical attachment loss compared to nonsmokers. Oral and respiratory cancers are among the most lethal known diseases caused by cigarette smoking and other commonly occurring sequelae such as stained teeth, periodontal diseases, etc.

Clinical and biochemical evaluation of oral irrigation in patients with peri-implant mucositis: a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

This randomized clinical trial aimed to compare the efficacy of an oral irrigator and an interdental brush in patients with peri-implant mucositis clinically and biochemically at different time points (at baseline and at the 2nd, 4th, and 12th weeks).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-five patients with at least one implant with peri-implant mucositis were included in the present study (n = 45). The patients were divided into three groups: oral irrigator + toothbrush (OI group, n = 15), interdental brush + toothbrush (IB group, n = 15), and toothbrush only (control) (C group, n = 15). The modified plaque index (mPlI), modified sulcus bleeding index (mSBI), probing pocket depth (PPD), probing attachment level (PAL), and bleeding on probing (BOP) were recorded at baseline and at the 2nd, 4th, and 12th weeks. The levels of interleukin 1 beta (IL-1β), transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-β), tissue-type plasminogen activator (t-PA), and plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) were also determined in the peri-implant crevicular fluid samples biochemically.

RESULTS

The mSBI and t-PA at the 2nd week (p = 0.003; p = 0.003); the mPlI, mSBI, BOP, t-PA, and PAI-1 at the 4th week (p < 0.05; p < 0.001; p < 0.001; p = 0.015; p = 0.011); and the mPlI, mSBI, IL-1β, t-PA, and PAI-1 at the 12th week (p < 0.05; p < 0.001; p = 0.013; p < 0.001; p = 0.002) were significantly lower in the OI group compared with those in the C group. Meanwhile, PAI-1 at the 2nd week, mSBI at the 4th week, and t-PA at the 12th week were significantly lower in the OI group compared with those in the IB group (p < 0.001; p = 0.011; p = 0.003). At the 2nd, 4th, and 12th weeks, all other parameters were not statistically different in the three groups.

CONCLUSION

The clinical indexes (such as mSBI and BOP) that play an important role in the diagnosis of peri-implant mucositis showed the lowest means (although limited) in the OI group at all evaluation time points. Moreover, when the clinical and biochemistry results were interpreted altogether, it became apparent that the OI group exhibited similar or more effective results than the IB group in resolving peri-implant mucositis. In light of the foregoing, this study concluded that the use of an oral irrigator can be as effective as an interdental brush in interdental cleaning.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

In this study, it is suggested that the regular use of an oral irrigator along with a toothbrush could be an appropriate alternative to other oral hygiene products such as dental floss and interdental brush for the management of peri-implant mucositis by preventing the accumulation of dental plaque (NCT03844035).

Comparison of photobiomodulation and photodynamic therapy as adjuncts to mechanical debridement for the treatment of peri-implantitis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) and photodynamic therapy (PDT) as adjuncts to mechanical debridement (MD) for the treatment of peri-implantitis. The present study is based on the null hypothesis that there is no difference in the peri-implant inflammatory parameters (modified plaque index [mPI], modified gingival index [mGI], probing depth [PD]) and crestal bone loss (CBL) following MD either with PBMT or PDT in patients with peri-implantitis.

METHODS

Forty-nine patients with peri-implantitis were randomly categorized into three groups. In Groups 1 and 2, patients underwent MD with adjunct PBMT and PDT, respectively. In Group 3, patients underwent MD alone (controls). Peri-implant inflammatory parameters were measured at baseline and 3-months follow-up. P-values < 0.01 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

At baseline, peri-implant clinicoradiographic parameters were comparable in all groups. Compared with baseline, there was a significant reduction in mPI (P< 0.001), mGI (P< 0.001) and PD (P< 0.001) in Groups 1 and 2 at 3-months follow-up. In Group 3, there was no difference in the scores of mPI, mGI and PD at follow-up. At 3-months follow-up, there was no difference in mPI, mGI and PD among patients in Groups 1 and 2. The mPI (P< 0.001), mGI (P< 0.001) and PD (P< 0.001) were significantly higher in Group 3 than Groups 1 and 2. The CBL was comparable in all groups at follow-up.

CONCLUSION

PBMT and PDT seem to be useful adjuncts to MD for the treatment of peri-implant soft-tissue inflammation among patients with peri-implantitis.

Efficacy of Adjunctive Antimicrobial Photodynamic Therapy to Mechanical Debridement in the Treatment of Peri-implantitis or Peri-implant Mucositis in Smokers: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine whether adjunctive use of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (a-PDT) in peri-implant diseases improves clinical outcomes in smokers. An electronic search was performed in MEDLINE (through PubMed), Scopus, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science and Google Scholar. The primary outcome measures were bleeding on probing (BOP) and pocket depth (PD). Plaque index (PI) was the secondary outcome. Four RCTs, (188 participants) comprised of 118 cigarette smokers, 38 E-cig smokers and 32 water pipe smokers with follow-up periods ranged from 6 weeks to 6 months were recruited. All trials applied diode laser in one session with wavelengths ranged from 660 to 670 nm. There was a significant difference between mechanical debridement (MD)+a-PDT and MD alone groups in PD (WMD = -1.26 mm, 95% CI: -2.19 to -0.32, P = 0.01) and PI (WMD = -10.60%, 95% CI: -14.46 to -6.74, P < 0.001) at 3-month follow-up. However, a great amount of heterogeneity was observed (PD: χ² = 199.19, I² = 98%, P < 0.001 and PI: χ² = 25.63, I² = 84.4%, P < 0.001). Due to methodological heterogeneity and small number of studies, this systematic review was unable to reach conclusive evidence in regards of adjunctive a-PDT efficacy in improving clinical parameters in smokers.

Photodynamic Therapy for Biomodulation and Disinfection in Implant Dentistry: Is It Feasible and Effective?

Dental implants are the most common rehabilitation and restorative treatment used to replace missing teeth. Biofilms adhere to implant surfaces to trigger implant-associated infection and inflammatory response. Clinically, the biofilm induces a local host response with the infiltration of phagocytic immune cells. The pro-inflammatory surroundings set off osteoclastogenesis, which leads to the septic loosening of the implant. The standard of dental care for implant-associated infection relies on a combination of surgery and antimicrobial therapy. Antimicrobial photodynamic therapy is a noninvasive and photochemistry-based approach capable of reducing bacterial load and modulating inflammatory responses. In this review, we explore the photobiomodulation and disinfection outcomes promoted by photodynamic therapy for implant infections, highlighting the quality of evidence on the most up-to-date studies, and discuss the major challenges on the advance of these therapeutic strategies.

The diode laser as coadyuvant therapy in the non-surgical conventional treatment of peri-implant mucositis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The present study systematically reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCT) to investigate the effect of diode laser therapy in the management of peri-implant mucositis.

Material and Methods

The electronic databases were searched until January 2020. Outcome measures were bleeding on probing (BOP), plaque index (PI) and probing depth (PD). The addressed PICO question was: Is the diode laser therapy effective reducing the signs of inflammation as an adjunctive element in the non-surgical treatment of peri-implant mucositis?.

Results

Eight randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included in the systematic review for qualitative synthesis and three in the meta-analysis for quantitative synthesis. All studies included in the quantitative synthesis have low risk of bias according to the Cochrane collaborations’ tool. Diode laser as coadyuvant therapy significantly reduced plaque index (SMD: -1.24; -0.47/-1.53) but not in bleeding on probing (SMD: -0.84; -0.31/-1.53) or probing pocket depth (SMD: -1.36; -0.28/-1.69). Non-statistically significant reductions in peri-implant bleeding on probing and in probing pocket depth were also observed in the test groups of most studies included in the meta-analysis.

Conclusions

The results should be interpreted cautiously due to the great heterogeneity in the methodology of the studies included in the systematic review. However the meta-analysis suggests that the use of diode lasers, as an adjunct in conventional non-surgical treatment of peri-implant mucositis, is promising in reducing the clinical signs of peri-implant mucositis, especially reducing the perii-implant plaque index.

Key words:Peri-implant diseases, peri-implant mucositis, laser therapy, diode laser.

Adjunctive Use of Lasers in Peri-Implant Mucositis and Peri-Implantitis Treatment: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The aim of this systematic review is to compare the effectiveness of lasers in the treatment of implant mucositis and peri-implantitis compared to conventional treatment (non-surgical or surgical: resective or regenerative).

METHODS

Sources of PubMed, Cochrane and Google Scholar search engines were used on articles published from 1997 to 2020 in English, with selected keyword criteria applied. Nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected.

RESULTS

All included studies were considered of "high quality" according to the quality assessment scale. The comparative assessment of the RCTs was done twice for each RCT based on the type of treatment and according to wavelength. There is strong scientific evidence that, regarding non-surgical treatment, adjunct laser application can provide better results only in the short term (three months). Regarding the surgical approach, the method of decontamination plays a subordinate role. All wavelengths/applications presented similar results.

CONCLUSION

Within the limitations of this study, the adjunctive use of lasers in the treatment of peri-implant inflammation is effective for up to three months; there is no strong evidence regarding the long term benefit compared to conventional treatment.

Does Probiotic Lactobacillus Have an Adjunctive Effect in the Nonsurgical Treatment of Peri-Implant Diseases? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the additional effect of probiotic Lactobacillus in the nonsurgical management of peri-implant diseases (peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis).

METHODS

Six databases were searched up to May 2019 without time and language restrictions. Study selection and data extraction were conducted independently by 2 reviewers. The inclusion criteria for this systematic review were defined based on the participants, intervention, comparison, outcomes, and study design (PICOS) format. Randomized controlled trials comparing nonsurgical treatment combined with probiotic Lactobacillus or placebo agent in patients with peri-implant diseases were included. The methodological quality of retrieved studies was assessed according to the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias tool, and the quality of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. Odds ratio and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to describe dichotomous data, while mean difference and standardized mean difference with 95% CI were used to describe continuous variables.

RESULTS

Seven randomized controlled trials with 296 implants were included in this meta-analysis. The mean difference of probing pocket depth (PPD) was -0.05 (95% CI: -0.28 to 0.18; P = .67) immediately after treatment termination and -0.17 (95% CI: -1.01 to 0.67, P = .69) at least 2 months after treatment termination. There was a slight reduction of PPD after treatment termination. Compared with placebo, Lactobacillus provided limited benefits in peri-implant mucositis. There were no significant differences in the secondary outcomes of bleeding on probing or plaque index (P > .05). In a narrative synthesis of peri-implantitis, the effect of Lactobacillus on PPD and bleeding on probing remained controversial.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review and meta-analysis showed that probiotic Lactobacillus provide limited benefits to the nonsurgical treatment of peri-implant mucositis or peri-implantitis.

Peri-implant clinical and radiographic status and whole salivary cotinine levels among cigarette and waterpipe smokers and never-smokers

The aim was to compare the peri-implant clinical and radiographic inflammatory parameters and whole salivary cotinine levels among cigarette smokers (CS), waterpipe smokers (WS) and never-smokers (NS). Thirty-four CS (Group 1), 33 WS (Group 2), and 31 NS (Group 3) were included. Peri-implant plaque index (PI), bleeding-on-probing (BOP), and probing depth (PD) were measured, and crestal bone loss (CBL) was assessed on standardized digital radiographs. Unstimulated whole saliva samples were collected and whole salivary cotinine levels were measured. Peri-implant PI and PD were higher in Groups 1 (P < 0.05) and 2 (P < 0.05) than in Group 3. Peri-implant BOP was significantly higher in Group 3 than in Groups 1 (P < 0.01) and 2 (P < 0.01). Peri-implant MBL was significantly higher in Groups 1 (P < 0.05) and 2 (P < 0.05) than in Group 3. There were significant differences in PI, BOP, PD, and CBL between Groups 1 and 2. There was no significant difference in the whole salivary cotinine levels in Groups 1 and 2. Peri-implant sites with plaque accumulation, PD, CBL, and whole salivary cotinine levels were higher in CS and WS than in NS, but did not differ between CS and WS.

Peri-implant soft-tissue parameters and crestal bone levels among narghile smokers and nonsmokers

This retrospective convenient sample case-control study investigated the peri-implant soft-tissue inflammatory parameters and crestal bone loss (CBL) among narghile smokers (NS) (Group I) and nonsmoking controls (Group II). Demographic data were collected using a questionnaire. Peri-implant plaque index (PI), bleeding-on-probing (BOP) and pocket-depth (PD) were assessed; and peri-implant CBL was measured on standardized digital bite-wing radiographs. Sample-size was estimated and statistical analysis were done using Mann-Whitney U-test. Level of significance was set at p < .05. Seventy-two male individuals (35 in Group I and 37 in Group II) were included. The mean age of individuals in Groups I and II were 45.3 ± 5.2 and 42.6 ± 3.3 years, correspondingly. In Group 1, the duration and daily frequency of narghile smoking was 17.5 ± 1.6 years and 6.3 ± 0.5 times per day, respectively. The mean duration of each narghile smoking session was 28.5 ± 0.6 min. The mean peri-implant PI (p < .05), PD (p < .05) and mesial (p < .05) and distal (p < .05) CBL were statistically significantly higher among individuals in Group I compared with Group II. BOP was significantly higher in Group II than Group I (p < .05). Narghile smoking increases peri-implant soft-tissue inflammation and CBL.