Antimicrobial photodynamic therapy using chloro-aluminum phthalocyanine for treating advanced stage-III periodontitis in smoking patients

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 active 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.

Effectiveness of photodynamic therapy adjunct to oral debridement in improving clinical, microbiological, and pain in necrotizing ulcerative gingivitis

To evaluate the efficacy of photodynamic therapy (PDT) as adjunctive to oral debridement (OD) in the improvement of clinical, microbiological, and pain in patients with necrotizing ulcerative gingivitis (NUG). Patients with NUG were split into two groups: Group-OD + PDT received PDT with OD, while Group-OD underwent OD alone. Clinical inflammatory parameters including full mouth plaque scores (FMPS), full mouth bleeding scores (FMBS), and probing depth (PD) were assessed. Fusobacterium nucleatum and Prevotella intermedia were analyzed using the polymerase chain reaction technique. Pain examination was done using various pain scales. Group PDT + OD showed more reduction in FMPS, FMBS, and greater reduction in F. nucleatum and P. intermedia count compared to group OD at 12 weeks follow up (p < 0.01). Group PDT + OD showed significantly lower pain scores at 12 weeks (p < 0.05). PDT was more effective in improving clinical parameters, and reducing bacterial counts and pain in NUG patients than dental scaling alone.

Photoinactivation and Photoablation of Porphyromonas gingivalis

Several types of phototherapy target human pathogens and Porphyromonas gingivitis (Pg) in particular. The various approaches can be organized into five different treatment modes sorted by different power densities, interaction times, effective wavelengths and mechanisms of action. Mode 1: antimicrobial ultraviolet (aUV); mode 2: antimicrobial blue light (aBL); mode 3: antimicrobial selective photothermolysis (aSP); mode 4: antimicrobial vaporization; mode 5: antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT). This report reviews the literature to identify for each mode (a) the putative molecular mechanism of action; (b) the effective wavelength range and penetration depth; (c) selectivity; (d) in vitro outcomes; and (e) clinical trial/study outcomes as these elements apply to Porphyromonas gingivalis (Pg). The characteristics of each mode influence how each is translated into the clinic.

Effectiveness of two photosensitizer-mediated photodynamic therapy for treating moderate peri-implant infections in type-II diabetes mellitus patients: A randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE

This study evaluated the impact of Fox Green (FG) against methylthioninium chloride (MTC)-facilitated photodynamic therapy (PDT) as an adjunctive to manual scaling (MS) on the peri‑implant clinical and cytokine parameters in type-2 diabetes mellitus (DM) patients with peri‑implantitis.

METHODS

Patients were divided into group-A comprising 13 patients who received adjunctive FG-PDT using a diode laser (wavelength: 810 nm; irradiation power: 300 mW; irradiation time: 30 s; fluence: 56 Jcm-2), group-B comprising 12 patients who received adjunctive MTC-PDT using a diode laser (wavelength: 660 nm; irradiation power: 100 mW; irradiation time: 120 s/site; fluence: 30 Jcm-2), and group-C comprising 13 patients who received MS alone [control group]). After diagnosing the diabetics with peri‑implantitis (established on eligibility criteria), a structured questionnaire was used to gather the information of the participants. Plaque (PS) and bleeding scores (BS), along with peri‑implant probing scores (PPS) and peri‑implant bone loss (PIBL), together with immunological variables (interleukin [IL]-6, tumor necrosis factor-alpha [TNF-α], and advanced glycation end products [AGEs]) were measured in all study group participants at baseline, 3-month, and 6-month follow-ups.

RESULTS

A significant reduction was observed for PS, BS, and PPS within all tested groups at each follow-up visits compared from their baseline values (p<0.05). However, a substantial decrease in PIBL was observed in all study group patients at 6-month follow-up as compared to 3-month follow-up (p<0.05). Regarding the levels of IL-6 and TNF-α, a substantial reduction was observed in all study groups until 6-month from their baseline scores (p<0.05). However, no changes were observed in the levels of AGEs in any group at either visit (p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

In DM patients with periimplantitis, adjunctive FG-PDT and MTC-PDT exhibited comparable outcomes in terms of peri‑implant clinical as well as pro-inflammatory characteristics than MS alone among peri‑implantitis patients with DM.

The adhesive strength of fiber post-to-canal dentin with Aniline green, Fotoenticine activated by PDT, green tea, and ozone as a final irrigant

AIM

The effect of novel final disinfection protocols Malachite green (MG), Fotoenticine® (FTC), Green tea extract (GTE), and Ozonated water (OW) on the bond strength of prefabricated glass fiber posts (PGFP) adhered to canal dentin.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

The canals of fifty premolars with closed apices were cleansed and obturated. The specimens were randomly assigned to one of five groups based on the final irrigant used, with the control group receiving NaOCl+EDTA and the experimental groups receiving MG, FTC, OW, and GTE. The GFP was cemented with a self-etching, dual-cure paste; the bond strength was estimated with a universal testing machine; and failure analysis was conducted with a stereomicroscope.

RESULTS

The highest PBS was observed in the coronal third of Group 4 (using ozonated water as the final irrigant), whereas the lowest bond integrity was observed in the apical section of Group 2 (1.02-0.54 MPa) using Malachite green as the final irrigant. Group 1, Group 4, and Group 5 exhibited no significant difference in the bond integrity of GFP to dentin when compared to Group 2 (p>0.05). In addition, comparable bond score values were obtained for Groups 2 and 3 (p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest that OW and GTE may be effective final disinfectants for root canals, as they increase the bond strength of resin-luting cement.

Effectiveness of photodynamic therapy on clinical and biomarker related periodontal parameters and oral health related quality of life (OHRQoL) in Parkinson's disease patients with stage III periodontitis

AIMS

To evaluate the clinical, radiographic, immune modulatory biomarkers and quality of life with the application of photodynamic therapy (PDT) as an adjunctive treatment to dental scaling and root planing (SRP) in patients with chronic periodontitis and Parkinson's disease.

METHODOLOGY

Individuals who had a confirmed diagnosis of stage III periodontitis and stage 4 Parkinson's disease according to Hoehn and Yahr scale were involved in this study. The participants were divided into two groups: Group SRP (n = 25) received traditional dental scaling procedure including full-mouth debridement and disinfection, and Group PDT + SRP (n = 25) received both traditional cleaning procedures along with adjunctive chloro‑aluminum phthalocyanine (CAPC) gel (0.005% concentration) mediated PDT. CAPC photosensitizer was activated using a diode laser (wavelength=640 nm, energy=4 J, 150 mW power, and overall power density of 300 J/cm2) for 60 s. The study measured clinical parameters such as plaque score (PI), bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), clinical attachment loss (CAL), and radiographic alveolar bone loss (ABL). Proinflammatory cytokine levels such as interleukin (IL)-6 and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) and oral health related quality of life were also assessed.

RESULTS

The mean age of patients in Group SRP was 73.3 years, while the mean age in Group PDT + SRP was 71.6 years. The PDT + SRP group showed a significant reduction in all clinical parameters at 6 and 12 months compared to the SRP group alone (p < 0.05). IL-6 and TNF-α levels were significantly reduced in the PDT + SRP group at 6 months compared to the SRP group alone (p < 0.05). However, at 12 months, both groups showed comparable TNF-α levels. The results showed that Group PDT + SRP had significantly lower OHIP scores compared to Group SRP, with a mean difference of 4.55 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.98 to 7.12) (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Combined SRP with PDT showed significant improvement compared to SRP alone in terms of clinical parameters, cytokine levels, and oral health-related quality of life in individuals diagnosed with stage III periodontitis associated with Parkinson's disease.

Photodynamic Therapy with Tolonium Chloride and a Diode Laser (635 nm) in the Non-Surgical Management of Periodontitis: A Clinical Study

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of photodynamic therapy (PDT) using tolonium chloride and a 635 nm diode laser as an adjunct to non-surgical periodontitis treatment, specifically scaling and root planing (SRP) alone. A total of 32 patients with a pocket probing depth > 5 mm were included in the study. Among them, 16 patients underwent SRP alone (control group), and the remaining 16 patients received SRP along with PDT (study group). The PDT procedure utilized a 635 nm diode laser (Smart M, Lasotronix, Poland) and tolonium chloride. Clinical periodontal parameters, such as the plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BOP), gingival recession (GR), probing pocket depth (PPD), and clinical attachment loss (CAL), were assessed before treatment (T0) and at 3 months after treatment (T3). At T3, both groups demonstrated a significant reduction in the PI, BOP, PD, and CAL compared to T0. The SRP + PDT group displayed a significant reduction in PPD (3.79 mm ± 0.35) compared to the SRP alone group (4.85 mm ± 0.42) at T3. Furthermore, the SRP + PDT group exhibited a significant reduction in CAL (5.01 ± 0.81) compared to the SRP group (5.99 ± 1.08) at T3. Within the study's limitations, it was concluded that PDT, with tolonium chloride and a 635 nm diode laser, significantly contributed to the non-surgical treatment of periodontitis.

Benefits of Antimicrobial Photodynamic Therapy as an Adjunct to Non-Surgical Periodontal Treatment in Smokers with Periodontitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The objective of this study was to analyze evidence of the clinical and microbiological benefits of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) adjunctive to scaling and root planing (SRP) in smokers with periodontitis. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included, through an electronic search in PubMed/MEDLINE, LILACS, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for articles published in English until December 2022. The quality of the studies was assessed using the JADAD scale and the risk of bias was estimated using the Cochrane Collaboration assessment tool. Of the 175 relevant articles, eight RCTs were included. Of these, seven reported clinical results and five microbiological results, with a follow-up time of 3–6 months. A meta-analysis was performed for the probing depth (PD) reduction and clinical attachment level (CAL) gain at 3 and 6 months. The weighted mean differences (WMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were counted for the PD and CAL. The overall effect for the PD reduction at 3 and 6 months (WMD = −0.80, 95% CI = −1.44 to −0.17, p = 0.01; WMD = −1.35, 95% CI = −2.23 to −0.46, p = 0.003) was in favor of aPDT. The CAL gain (WMD = 0.79, 95% CI = −1.24 to −0.35, p = 0.0005) was statistically significant at 6 months, in favor of aPDT. In these RCTs, aPDT was unable to demonstrate efficacy in reducing the microbial species associated with periodontitis. aPDT as an adjuvant to SRP improves the PD reduction and CAL gain more effectively than only SRP. RCTs are needed to establish standardized protocols with longer follow-up times in order to provide more results on aPDT adjunctive to SRP in smokers with periodontitis.