Effect of Low-Level Laser Therapy on Relapse of Rotated Teeth: A Systematic Review of Human and Animal Study

Comparing Circumferential Supracrestal Fiberotomy with Surgical Scalpel Versus Photobiomodulation in Orthodontic Relapse Reduction: A Clinical Trial

Objective: This investigation aimed to compare the efficacy of circumferential supracrestal fiberotomy (CSF) with surgical scalpel, laser CSF, and photobiomodulation for reduction of relapse after orthodontic tooth rotation. Background: Relapse is the tendency of teeth to move back to their preoperative position after removal of orthodontic appliances. Materials and methods: This randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted on 90 rotated teeth at the final stages of fixed orthodontic treatment. The teeth were randomly divided into six groups (n = 15) of (1) control (no intervention), (2) photobiomodulation alone (wavelength of 940 nm, 0.2 W, and 4 J/cm2), (3) conventional CSF, (4) laser CSF (wavelength of 940 nm, 1.5 W, and 4 J/cm2, and power density of 160 mW/cm2), (5) conventional CSF plus photobiomodulation, and (6) laser CSF plus photobiomodulation. Measurements were made on clinical photographs and dental casts using the AutoCAD software. Level of pain of patients was measured within the first 24 h after fiberotomy using a visual analog scale. Data were analyzed by ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis test (α = 0.05). Results: The magnitude (p = 0.014) and percentage (p = 0.035) of relapse were significantly different among the six groups, and they were the highest in the control group followed by photobiomodulation alone, laser CSF, conventional CSF, conventional CSF plus photobiomodulation, and finally, laser CSF plus photobiomodulation. Moreover, photobiomodulation plus laser CSF and photobiomodulation plus conventional CSF had significantly different results from the other groups. The six groups had no significant difference in sulcus depth changes, gingival recession (difference in primary and secondary crown height), or pain score (p > 0.05). Conclusions: This study suggests that utilizing photobiomodulation combined with laser CSF or conventional CSF can be effective in reducing relapse. However, further clinical trials are required to support this idea. Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT20210621051653N1).

Effect of photobiomodulation therapy on mini-implant stability: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The study aimed to assess trials investigating the effect of PBMT on mini-implant stability. Electronic searches of seven databases and manual search were conducted up to May 2020. Randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials evaluating the effect of PBMT on mini-implant stability were included. The risks of bias of individual studies were performed using ROB 2.0 and ROBINS-I-tool based on different study design. Meta-analysis was conducted to compare mini-implant stability exposed to PBMT with control ones at different time points after implantation. Among the 518 records initially identified, seven studies were included in this study. Six studies investigated low-level laser therapy (LLLT) and one study evaluated light-emitting diode (LED) therapy. Two studies were eligible for meta-analysis, which showed that LLLT significantly improved mini-implant stability 60 days after initial implantation (MD - 3.01, 95% CI range [- 4.68, - 1.35], p = 0.0004). High energy density of LLLT began to show beneficial effect on mini-implant stability as early as 3 days after implantation, while the significant effect of low energy density displayed later than 30 days after insertion. LED therapy could improve mini-implant stability after 2 months post-insertion. In conclusion, PBMT appears to be beneficial in ameliorating mini-implant stability. High energy density of LLLT might exert more rapid effect than low energy density. More high-quality clinical trials are needed to further demonstrate PBMT' effects on orthodontic mini-implants.

Use of Laser Systems in Orthodontics

Laser systems have been used in the practice of dentistry for >35 years. Laser systems have so many advantages, such as increase patient cooperation, reduce the duration of treatment time, and help the orthodontists to enhance the design of a patient's smile to improve treatment efficacy, and the success of orthodontic treatments can also be improved by diminishing the orthodontic pain and the discomfort of the patients. Laser systems also have some disadvantages, such as cost, large space requirements for some types, and high-risk potential for physician and patient if not used at the appropriate wavelength and power density, that is why before incorporating lasers into clinical practice, the physician must fully understand the basic science, safety protocol, and risks associated with them. Lasers have many applications in orthodontics, including accelerating tooth movement, bonding and debonding processes, pain reduction, bone regeneration, etching procedures, increase mini-implant stability, soft tissue procedures (gingivectomy, frenectomy, operculectomy, papilla flattening, uncovering temporary anchorage devices, ablation of aphthous ulcerations, and exposure of impacted teeth), fiberotomy, scanning systems, and welding procedures. In reviewing the literature on the use of laser in orthodontics, many studies have been conducted. The purpose of the present study was to give information about the use of laser in the field of orthodontics, the effects of laser during the postoperative period, and its advantages and disadvantages and to provide general information about the requirements to be considered during the use of laser.

Systematic reviews in orthodontics: Impact of the PRISMA for Abstracts checklist on completeness of reporting

INTRODUCTION

This study evaluated and compared the completeness of reporting of abstracts of orthodontics systematic reviews before and after the publication of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for Abstracts Checklist (PRISMA-A).

METHODS

Abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in orthodontics published in PubMed, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews databases before March 23, 2018, that met the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, were evaluated using the 12 items of PRISMA-A, scoring each item from 0 to 2. Abstracts were classified into 2 groups: before and after publication of the PRISMA-A checklist. Three calibrated evaluators (intraclass correlation coefficient and kappa > 0.8) assessed the scores for compliance with the checklist. The number of authors, country of affiliation of the first author, performance of meta-analysis, and topic of the article were recorded. A regression analysis was performed to assess the associations between abstract characteristics and the PRISMA-A scores.

RESULTS

Of 1034 abstracts evaluated, 389 were included in the analysis. The mean PRISMA-A score was 53.39 (95% CI, 51.83-54.96). The overall score for studies published after the publication of the checklist was significantly higher than for studies published before (P ≤ 0.0001). The components returning significantly higher scores after publication of PRISMA-A were title (P = 0.024), information from databases (P = 0.026), risk of bias (P ≤ 0.0001), included studies (P ≤ 0.0001), synthesis of results (P ≤ 0.0001), interpretation of results (P = 0.035), financing and conflict of interest (P ≤ 0.0001), and registration (P ≤ 0.0001). These results showed the positive effect of PRISMA-A had on the quality of reporting of orthodontics systematic reviews. Nevertheless, the poor adherence revealed that there is still need for improvement in the quality of abstract reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of reporting of abstracts of orthodontic systematic reviews and meta-analyses increased after the introduction of PRISMA-A.