Er:YAG laser treatment in supportive periodontal therapy

Er:YAG Laser Therapy on Alveolar Osteitis After Mandibular Third Molar Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Study

Background: Alveolar osteitis (AO) or "dry socket" affects the quality of life of patients, and there is a high clinical demand for its effective treatment. Objective: To evaluate the effect of Er:YAG laser therapy (ErLT) on AO after mandibular third molar surgery. Methods: Eighty-three patients were randomly divided into Er (n = 43) and control groups (n = 40). In the Er group, the Er:YAG laser (2940 nm; AT Fidelis Fotona, Ljubljana, Slovenia) was used to irradiate the AO site directly in micro short-pulsed mode (pulse duration 0.1 ms, pulse energy 100 mJ, frequency 40 Hz, water 4, and air 2) until all debris and necrotic material had been removed, exposing fresh bone and soft tissue surfaces with blood exudation. The control group received mechanical therapy until the treated lesions resembled those in the Er group. Pain assessment was performed at baseline and on days 1-7 post-intervention using the visual analog scale (VAS). Wound healing was assessed using the wound healing index (WHI). The operating times of the two therapies were also recorded. Results: Group Er had lower VAS scores than the control group on days 1-3 (p = 0.00). There was no significant difference between the two groups on days 4-7 (p = 0.15). The WHI scores were better in the Er group than those in the control group (t = 2.65, p = 0.01), especially in terms of redness (t = 2.70, p = 0.01). There was no significant difference in the operating time between the two groups (t = 0.76, p = 0.45). Conclusions: Compared with mechanical therapy, ErLT for AO provides rapid pain relief and improved wound healing.

The efficacy of adjunctive periodontal therapies during supportive periodontal care in patients with residual pockets. A systematic review and meta-analysis

While it is well-established that patients that develop signs of relapsing periodontitis in supportive periodontal care (SPC) will need to repeat subgingival instrumentation of the residual pockets, less certainty is available in terms of which protocol should be followed and whether the use of adjunctive therapies or physical agents might provide additional benefits to repeated instrumentation alone. The aim of this systematic review was therefore to assess whether repeating subgingival instrumentation in combination with adjunctive therapies (other than antimicrobials) might provide a significant benefit in terms of pocket closure, probing pocket depth (PPD) reduction or clinical attachment level (CAL) gain in patients during SPC with residual/relapsing pockets. Four databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) with a minimum follow-up of 3 months that investigated the use of adjunctive therapies (other than antimicrobials) in case of residual/relapsing pockets in patients in SPC since at least 3 months. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were performed in the studies meeting the inclusion criteria and meta-analysis was performed when ≥3 studies assessing the same adjunctive therapy were identified. 12 studies (2 CCTs and 10 RCTs) were included for qualitative analysis. Meta-analysis was performed only for 3 studies on the adjunctive use of photodynamic therapy (PDT) and it indicated a nonsignificant benefit compared to the placebo in terms of PPD reduction and CAL gain at 3 months (weighted mean difference 0.07 and -0.03, respectively) and at 6 months of follow-up (weighted mean difference -0.09 and -0.18, respectively). While antiseptics did not provide significant benefits, one study on probiotics and one on the use of vitamin D and calcium supplementation showed significant improvements in periodontal parameters. There is currently insufficient/poor evidence to determine the efficacy of adjunctive strategies (other than antimicrobials) to improve the outcomes of SPC in case of residual/relapsing pockets.

Erbium lasers in non-surgical periodontal therapy: an umbrella review and evidence gap map analysis

The literature on the efficacy of erbium lasers for nonsurgical periodontal therapy is inconsistent. The objective of the umbrella review was to collate the information available in the systematic reviews to provide a comprehensive synthesis of clinical and patient reported outcomes following the use of erbium lasers for non-surgical periodontal therapy. An electronic database search was carried out, and systematic reviews/meta-analyses which assessed the efficacy of erbium lasers as monotherapy or as an adjunct to scaling and root planing were included. The methodological quality and reporting quality of the included studies were assessed. 15 Systematic reviews/meta-analyses were obtained after title, abstract, and full text search. The meta-analyses data revealed a clinical attachment level gain, reduction in probing pocket depth at 1 and 3-month follow-up, and no additional benefit at ≥ 6-month follow-up in the erbium laser group. The evidence gap map revealed lack of clinical outcome data at > 6-month follow-up and dearth in studies assessing patient reported outcome measures and adverse events. Erbium lasers may provide short-term clinical benefits, and further studies with standardized laser parameters evaluating long-term follow-up, patient-reported outcome measures, and adverse events are needed.

Effects of Physical Stimulation in the Field of Oral Health

Physical stimulation has been widely used in clinical medicine and healthcare due to its noninvasiveness. The main applications of physical stimulation in the oral cavity include laser, ultrasound, magnetic field, and vibration, which have photothermal, cavitation, magnetocaloric, and mechanical effects, respectively. In addition, the above four stimulations with their unique biological effects, which can play a role at the gene, protein, and cell levels, can provide new methods for the treatment and prevention of common oral diseases. These four physical stimulations have been used as important auxiliary treatment methods in the field of orthodontics, implants, periodontal, dental pulp, maxillofacial surgery, and oral mucosa. This paper systematically describes the application of physical stimulation as a therapeutic method in the field of stomatology to provide guidance for clinicians. In addition, some applications of physical stimulation in specific directions are still at the research stage, and the specific mechanism has not been fully elucidated. To encourage further research on the oral applications of physical stimulation, we elaborate the research results and development history of various physical stimuli in the field of oral health.

Efficacy of alternative or additional methods to professional mechanical plaque removal during supportive periodontal therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

To systematically review the literature addressing the following focused questions: "What is the efficacy of either (#1) alternative or (#2) additional methods to professional mechanical plaque removal (PMPR) on progression of attachment loss during supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) in periodontitis patients?".

METHODS

A systematic search for randomized clinical trials was performed. Change in clinical attachment level (CAL) from baseline was the primary outcome.

RESULTS

Routine PMPR performed with either a combination of ultrasonic/hand instruments or Er:Yag laser showed similarly effective in preventing CAL loss. Moreover, a routine SPT regimen based on PMPR led to stability of CAL irrespective of a daily sub-antimicrobial doxycycline dose (SDD). Finally, an adjunctive photodynamic therapy (PDT) did not enhance the magnitude of CAL gain when sites with probing depth ≥4 mm were repeatedly treated. After pooling all data, the results of the meta-analysis showed no statistical differences in CAL change from baseline: mean overall CAL change was -0.233 mm (95% confidence interval: -1.065, 0.598; p = .351).

CONCLUSIONS

Weak evidence indicate that in treated periodontitis patients enrolled in a 3-4 month SPT based on PMPR, Er:Yag laser (as alternative), SDD and PDT (as additional) do not produce a greater clinical effect on periodontal conditions compared to PMPR.

Impact of Local Drug Delivery of Minocycline on the Subgingival Microbiota during Supportive Periodontal Therapy: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study

The aim of this study was to examine the effect of adjunct local minocycline administration on the microbiological parameters of subgingival plaque samples in the residual periodontal pockets. Ten chronic periodontitis patients under a supportive periodontal therapy regimen were recruited. After subgingival debridement, either 2% minocycline gel, Periocline™, (Test Group) or a placebo (Control Group) was administered to the selected sites once a week for three weeks. Subgingival plaque was collected at baseline, and at four weeks and eight weeks. The microbiological composition was analyzed by 16S ribosomal RNA sequencing. In the Test Group, α-diversity (evenness) decreased compared to the baseline (p = 0.005) and was lower compared to the control group at four weeks (p = 0.003). The microbial community composition between the two groups was significantly different at four weeks (p = 0.029). These changes were attributable to a decrease in the bacteria associated with periodontitis and an increase in the bacteria associated with periodontal health. Additionally, the improvement in bleeding on probing continued at eight weeks; however, there were little microbial effects of 2% minocycline gel observed at eight weeks. The control group demonstrated no change throughout the eight-week experimental period. Thus, local minocycline administration can change the subgingival microbial community of residual periodontal pockets.

Clinical and Immunological Effects of Er,Cr:YSGG Laser in Nonsurgical Periodontal Treatment: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and immunological results of nonsurgical periodontal treatment with or without the erbium, chromium:yttrium-scandium-gallium-garnet (Er,Cr:YSGG) laser. Background data: As lasers have begun to be used in dentistry, the Er,Cr:YSGG laser has started to attract attention in the field of periodontology. Materials and methods: Fifty-nine nonsmoking patients with advanced chronic periodontitis were randomly allocated to a test group (full-mouth ultrasonic supra- and subgingival debridement+Er,Cr:YSGG laser application) and a control group (full-mouth ultrasonic supra- and subgingival debridement+root planing with Gracey curettes). The laser parameters were set as follows: 1.5 W output power, pulse mode H (pulse duration of 140 μs), pulse frequency of 20 Hz, and an air-water spray ratio of 10% air and 15% water. The instrumentation was performed until the operator felt that the root surfaces were adequately debrided. Probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), bleeding on probing (BOP), plaque index, interleukin-1 beta (IL-1β), matrix metalloproteinase-8 (MMP-8), tissue inhibitor metalloproteinase-1 (TIMP-1), and MMP-8/TIMP-1 levels in gingival crevicular fluid were evaluated at baseline, 6 weeks, and 3 months postoperatively. Results: There were statistically significant differences in PD, which was our primary outcome, and BOP between the groups at both examinations [p < 0.001 and p < 0.001 (for PD) and p = 0.048 and p < 0.001 (for BOP), respectively], in favor of the laser group. However, there were no significant differences among groups at any time for CAL gain (p = 563 and p = 369, respectively). No significant differences in MMP-8, TIMP-1, and MMP-8/TIMP-1 levels were detected among groups. There was a statistically significant difference for IL-1β levels among groups at 3-month evaluations in favor of the laser group. Conclusions: Using the Er,Cr:YSGG laser instead of hand instruments in nonsurgical periodontal treatment has shown additional improvements in terms of pocket reduction and gingival bleeding compared with traditional nonsurgical therapy.

Supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) for maintaining the dentition in adults treated for periodontitis

BACKGROUND

Periodontitis is a bacterially-induced, chronic inflammatory disease that destroys the connective tissues and bone that support teeth. Active periodontal treatment aims to reduce the inflammatory response, primarily through eradication of bacterial deposits. Following completion of treatment and arrest of inflammation, supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) is employed to reduce the probability of re-infection and progression of the disease; to maintain teeth without pain, excessive mobility or persistent infection in the long term, and to prevent related oral diseases.According to the American Academy of Periodontology, SPT should include all components of a typical dental recall examination, and importantly should also include periodontal re-evaluation and risk assessment, supragingival and subgingival removal of bacterial plaque and calculus, and re-treatment of any sites showing recurrent or persistent disease. While the first four points might be expected to form part of the routine examination appointment for periodontally healthy patients, the inclusion of thorough periodontal evaluation, risk assessment and subsequent treatment - normally including mechanical debridement of any plaque or calculus deposits - differentiates SPT from routine care.Success of SPT has been reported in a number of long-term, retrospective studies. This review aimed to assess the evidence available from randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) in the maintenance of the dentition of adults treated for periodontitis.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 8 May 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2017, Issue 5), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 8 May 2017), and Embase Ovid (1980 to 8 May 2017). The US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating SPT versus monitoring only or alternative approaches to mechanical debridement; SPT alone versus SPT with adjunctive interventions; different approaches to or providers of SPT; and different time intervals for SPT delivery.We excluded split-mouth studies where we considered there could be a risk of contamination.Participants must have completed active periodontal therapy at least six months prior to randomisation and be enrolled in an SPT programme. Trials must have had a minimum follow-up period of 12 months.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened search results to identify studies for inclusion, assessed the risk of bias in included studies and extracted study data. When possible, we calculated mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous variables. Two review authors assessed the quality of evidence for each comparison and outcome using GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four trials involving 307 participants aged 31 to 85 years, who had been previously treated for moderate to severe chronic periodontitis. Three studies compared adjuncts to mechanical debridement in SPT versus debridement only. The adjuncts were local antibiotics in two studies (one at high risk of bias and one at low risk) and photodynamic therapy in one study (at unclear risk of bias). One study at high risk of bias compared provision of SPT by a specialist versus general practitioner. We did not identify any RCTs evaluating the effects of SPT versus monitoring only, or of providing SPT at different time intervals, or that compared the effects of mechanical debridement using different approaches or technologies.No included trials measured our primary outcome 'tooth loss'; however, studies evaluated signs of inflammation and potential periodontal disease progression, including bleeding on probing (BoP), clinical attachment level (CAL) and probing pocket depth (PPD).There was no evidence of a difference between SPT delivered by a specialist versus a general practitioner for BoP or PPD at 12 months (very low-quality evidence). This study did not measure CAL or adverse events.Due to heterogeneous outcome reporting, it was not possible to combine data from the two studies comparing mechanical debridement with or without the use of adjunctive local antibiotics. Both studies found no evidence of a difference between groups at 12 months (low to very low-quality evidence). There were no adverse events in either study.The use of adjunctive photodynamic therapy did not demonstrate evidence of benefit compared to mechanical debridement only (very low-quality evidence). Adverse events were not measured.The quality of the evidence is low to very low for these comparisons. Future research is likely to change the findings, therefore the results should be interpreted with caution.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, there is insufficient evidence to determine the superiority of different protocols or adjunctive strategies to improve tooth maintenance during SPT. No trials evaluated SPT versus monitoring only. The evidence available for the comparisons evaluated is of low to very low quality, and hampered by dissimilarities in outcome reporting. More trials using uniform definitions and outcomes are required to address the objectives of this review.

Current concepts in the use of lasers in periodontal and implant dentistry

Lasers have various periodontal applications including calculus removal (Er: YAG, Er, Cr: YSGG lasers); soft tissue excision, incision and ablation; decontamination of root and implant surfaces; biostimulation; bacteria reduction; and osseous surgery. This paper reviews some of the major opportunities for using lasers in periodontal and implant specialty practices. The literature relating to the use of lasers for removal of the pocket epithelium, root conditioning, bacterial reduction and decontamination of infected implant surfaces is discussed, and a summary of the advantages and disadvantages of using lasers for periodontal treatment is provided.

Microbiological effects and recolonization patterns after adjunctive subgingival debridement with Er:YAG laser

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to assess the microbiological effects and recolonization patterns after non-surgical periodontal treatment protocol based on the adjunctive use of erbium-doped yttrium aluminium garnet (Er:YAG) laser.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients diagnosed with chronic periodontitis were randomly assigned to two different treatment protocols: test, full-mouth subgingival ultrasonic instrumentation followed by Er-YAG laser application 1 week later to sites with initial probing pocket depth ≥4.5 mm; and control, full-mouth ultrasonic subgingival instrumentation within 1 week. Clinical (at sampled sites) and microbiological (culture-based) parameters were recorded at baseline and 3 and 12 months. Microbiological variables included total counts, frequency of detection, proportions and counts of target species.

RESULTS

Results from 19 test and 21 control patients were compared. Minor changes were observed for total colony-forming units, with no differences between groups. For the frequency of detection, a limited and similar impact in both groups was observed for the most prevalent (over 80 %) periodontal pathogens (Porphyromonas gingivalis, Prevotella intermedia, Fusobacterium nucleatum). For proportions, reductions in P. gingivalis occurred at 3 months, both in the test and control groups (from 16.3 to 10 % and 16 to 14.8 %, respectively), although these differences were not statistically significant. At 12 months, the test group showed a statistically significant greater reduction in probing depth for the sampled sites.

CONCLUSIONS

The adjunctive use of Er:YAG laser when compared with conventional ultrasonic debridement did not provide a microbiological added benefit.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Even though some clinical benefits with the adjunctive laser application were identified when comparing both treatment protocols, there were no differences in microbiological outcomes or in the bacterial recolonization patterns.

Adjunctive clinical effect of a water-cooled Nd:YAG laser in a periodontal maintenance care programme: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Various laser systems are currently available for intra-oral use. Neodymium:Yttrium-Aluminium Garnet lasers(Nd:YAG) have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for soft tissue treatment in the oral cavity.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to test whether the use of a water-cooled Nd:YAG laser during a maintenance care programme as an adjunct to supragingival and subgingival debridement (scaling and root planing, SRP) with hand and ultrasonic instruments results in clinical improvement compared with SRP alone.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This study was an examiner-blind, randomized and controlled clinical trial using a split-mouth design. Thirty subjects were selected, originally diagnosed with moderate to severe generalized periodontitis, following a periodontal maintenance care programme (PMC). Immediately after SRP in two randomly assigned contra-lateral quadrants, all pockets ≥5 mm were additionally treated with a Nd:YAG laser (1064 nm, 4W, 250-μsec pulse). Clinical assessments [probing pocket depth PPD, bleeding on pocket probing (BOPP)] were performed pre-treatment and at 6 months. Based on these assessments, the periodontal inflamed surface area (PISA) was calculated.

RESULTS

At 6 months, the clinical parameters had significantly improved for both regimens. No statistically significant differences between treatment modalities were observed for PPD and BOPP scores at any time. PISA scores supported these findings.

CONCLUSIONS

In residual pockets ≥5 mm, treated in a PMC, the adjunctive use of an Nd:YAG laser does not provide a clinically significant additional advantage.

Er:YAG laser in the treatment of periodontal sites with recurring chronic inflammation: a 12-month randomized, controlled clinical trial

AIM

The objective of this randomized, controlled clinical trial was to compare the clinical and microbiological effects of pocket debridement using erbium-doped: yttrium, aluminium and garnet (Er:YAG) laser with conventional debridement in maintenance patients.

MATERIAL & METHODS

Fifteen patients, all smokers, having at least four teeth with residual probing depth (PD) ≥ 5 mm were recruited. Two pockets in two jaw quadrants were randomly assigned to subgingival debridement using an Er:YAG laser (test) or ultrasonic scaler/curette (control) at 3-month intervals. Relative attachment level (RAL), PD, bleeding on probing and dental plaque were recorded at baseline and at 6 and 12 months. Microbiological subgingival samples were taken at the same time points and analysed using a checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridization technique.

RESULTS

A significant decrease in PD took place in both treatments from baseline to 12 months (p < 0.01). In the control, the mean initial PD decreased from 5.4 to 4.0 mm at 12 months. For the test, a similar decrease occurred. No significant between-treatment differences were shown at any time point. The mean RAL showed no overall significant inter- or intra-treatment differences (p > 0.05). No significant between-treatment differences were observed in subgingival microbiological composition or total pathogens.

CONCLUSION

The results failed to support that an Er:YAG laser may be superior to conventional debridement in the treatment of smokers with recurring chronic inflammation. This appears to be the first time that repeated Er-YAG laser instrumentation has been compared with mechanical instrumentation of periodontal sites with recurring chronic inflammation over a clinically relevant time period.