The Adjunctive Use of the Erbium, Chromium: Yttrium Scandium Gallium Garnet Laser in Closed Flap Periodontal Therapy. A Retrospective Cohort Study

Current status of Er:YAG laser in periodontal surgery

Lasers have numerous advantageous tissue interactions such as ablation or vaporization, hemostasis, bacterial killing, as well as biological effects, which induce various beneficial therapeutic effects and biological responses in the tissues. Thus, lasers are considered an effective and suitable device for treating a variety of inflammatory and infectious conditions of periodontal disease. Among various laser systems, the Er:YAG laser, which can be effectively and safely used in both soft and hard tissues with minimal thermal side effects, has been attracting much attention in periodontal therapy. This laser can effectively and precisely debride the diseased root surface including calculus removal, ablate diseased connective tissues within the bone defects, and stimulate the irradiated surrounding periodontal tissues during surgery, resulting in favorable wound healing as well as regeneration of periodontal tissues. The safe and effective performance of Er:YAG laser-assisted periodontal surgery has been reported with comparable and occasionally superior clinical outcomes compared to conventional surgery. This article explains the characteristics of the Er:YAG laser and introduces its applications in periodontal surgery including conventional flap surgery, regenerative surgery, and flapless surgery, based on scientific evidence from currently available basic and clinical studies as well as cases reports.

Clinical evaluation of Er,Cr:YSGG laser therapy used as an adjunct to non-surgical treatment of periodontitis: Twelve-month results from a pilot study

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the results of adjunctive Er,Cr:YSGG laser therapy with scaling and root planing (SRP) as compared to SRP alone in the treatment of moderate-severe periodontitis.

METHODS

Fifteen adults (aged 27 to 65 years) with ninety non-adjacent sites probing ≥ 5 mm were treated in split-mouth design with SRP and laser therapy versus SRP alone. Probing pocket depth (PPD), gingival recession (GR), clinical attachment level (CAL), plaque, and bleeding on probing were collected at baseline, 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Patient reported outcomes were measured to assess pain, sensitivity and satisfaction.

RESULTS

Clinical improvements were similar for test and control sites with no statistically significant difference. At twelve months, the average PPD reduced from 6.1mm to 4.2mm for test and 6.2mm to 4.3mm for control sites. GR increased by 0.4mm at test and control sites. CAL increased from 6.8 mm to 5.3mm for test and 6.9mm to 5.5mm for control sites. Clinical outcomes were stratified by baseline PPD ( = 5mm, = 6mm and ≥7mm) and analyzed for number of sites that reduced (≤4mm). No significant difference was observed when the baseline PPD was 5mm or 6mm. Test sites with baseline PPD ≥7mm demonstrated a statistically significant difference in the percentage of reduced sites when compared to controls at 9 (p = 0.001) and 12 months (p = 0.044).

CONCLUSIONS

Adjunctive Er,Cr:YSGG laser therapy with SRP provides similar clinical improvement in the treatment of moderate-severe periodontitis as SRP alone and may offer some advantage for deeper (≥7mm) pockets. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Adjunctive laser or antimicrobial photodynamic therapy to non-surgical mechanical instrumentation in patients with untreated periodontitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To compare the adjunctive effects of lasers or antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) to non-surgical mechanical instrumentation alone in untreated periodontitis patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two focused questions were addressed using the Population, Intervention, Comparison and Outcome criteria as follows: in patients with untreated periodontitis, (a) does laser application provide adjunctive effects on probing pocket depth (PPD) changes compared with non-surgical instrumentation alone? and (b) does application of aPDT provide adjunctive effects on PPD changes compared with non-surgical instrumentation alone? Both randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) were included. Results of the meta-analysis are expressed as weighted mean differences (WMD) and reported according to the PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

Out of 1,202 records, 10 articles for adjunctive laser and 8 for adjunctive aPDT were included. With respect to PPD changes, 1 meta-analysis including 2 articles (total n = 42; split-mouth design) failed to identify a statistically significant difference (WMD = 0.35 mm; 95%CI: -0.04/0.73; p = .08) in favour of adjunctive aPDT (wavelength range 650-700 nm). In terms of adjunctive laser application, a high variability of clinical outcomes at 6 months was noted. Two articles included patient-reported outcomes and 10 reported on the presence/absence of harms/adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Available evidence on adjunctive therapy with lasers and aPDT is limited by (a) the low number of controlled studies and (b) the heterogeneity of study designs. Patient-reported benefits remain to be demonstrated.