Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Antimicrobial Photodynamic Therapy in Residual Periodontal Pockets during the Maintenance Phase

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.

Efficacy of photodynamic therapy as an adjunct to scaling and root planing on clinical parameters and microbial composition in subgingival plaque of periodontitis patients: A split-mouth randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of photodynamic therapy (PDT) as an adjunct to scaling and root planing (SRP) on clinical parameters and microbial composition in subgingival plaque of periodontitis patients.

METHODS

Seventeen patients were included in this split-mouth randomized clinical trial. Sites with probing pocket depth (PPD) ≥5 mm in combination with bleeding on probing in different quadrants were randomized into the control group, the group with a single PDT application right after SRP, and the group with three repeated PDT applications 1 week after SRP. The subgingival plaque was collected for 16S rRNA gene sequencing at baseline, Week 2, and Week 8.

RESULTS

Seventeen patients with 60 sites completed this 8-week follow-up, and 157 subgingival plaques were successfully analyzed by sequencing. Significant improvements were observed in two primary outcomes: PPD at Week 8 and subgingival microbial composition. Compared to the control group, the repeated-PDT group showed a notable improvement in PPD, substantial alterations in the microbial profile, including a reduction in α-diversity and anaerobic bacteria, and an increase in aerobic bacteria at Week 2. Secondary outcomes, such as clinical attachment level and sulcus bleeding index, also showed improvement at Week 8. Furthermore, both the single- and repeated-PDT groups exhibited a decrease in periodontopathogens and an increase in beneficial bacteria compared with baseline.

CONCLUSION

PDT promotes changes in the microbial composition of periodontitis patients' subgingival plaque in a direction favorable to periodontal health, and repeated PDT is a promising adjunctive therapy for periodontal treatment.

Insights into Intra Periodontal Pocket Pathogenesis, Treatment, In Vitro-In Vivo Models, Products and Patents, Challenges and Opportunity

Periodontal disease is a multifactorial pathogenic condition involving microbial infection, inflammation, and various systemic complications. Here, a systematic and comprehensive review discussing key-points such as the pros and cons of conventional methods, new advancements, challenges, patents and products, and future prospects is presented. A systematic review process was adopted here by using the following keywords: periodontal diseases, pathogenesis, models, patents, challenges, recent developments, and 3-D printing scaffolds. Search engines used were "google scholar", "web of science", "scopus", and "pubmed", along with textbooks published over the last few decades. A thorough study of the published data rendered an accurate and deep understanding of periodontal diseases, the gap of research so far, and future opportunities. Formulation scientists and doctors need to be interconnected for a better understanding of the disease to prescribe a quality product. Moreover, prime challenges (such as a lack of a vital testing model, scarcity of clinical and preclinical data, products allowing for high drug access to deeper tissue regions for prolonged residence, lack of an international monitoring body, lack of 4D or time controlled scaffolds, and lack of successful AI based tools) exist that must be addressed for designing new quality products. Generally, several products have been commercialized to treat periodontal diseases with certain limitations. Various strategic approaches have been attempted to target certain delivery regions, maximize residence time, improve efficacy, and reduce toxicity. Conclusively, the current review summarizes valuable information for researchers and healthcare professional to treat a wide range of periodontal diseases.

Photodynamic therapy in periodontitis: A narrative review

BACKGROUND

Periodontitis, a chronic infectious disease, is primarily caused by a dysbiotic microbiome, leading to the destruction of tooth-supporting tissues and tooth loss. Photodynamic therapy (PDT), which combines excitation light with photosensitizers (PS) and oxygen to produce antibacterial reactive oxygen species, is emerging as a promising adjuvant treatment for periodontitis.

METHODS

This review focuses on studies examining the antibacterial effects of PDT against periodontal pathogens. It also explores the impact of PDT on various aspects of periodontal health, including periodontal immune cells, human gingival fibroblasts, gingival collagen, inflammatory mediators, cytokines in the periodontium, vascular oxidative stress, vascular behavior, and alveolar bone health. Clinical trials assessing the types of PSs and light sources used in PDT, as well as its effects on clinical and immune factors in gingival sulcus fluid and the bacterial composition of dental plaque, are discussed.

RESULTS

The findings indicate that PDT is effective in reducing periodontal pathogens and improving markers of periodontal health. It has shown positive impacts on periodontal immune response, tissue integrity, and alveolar bone preservation. Clinical trials have demonstrated improvements in periodontal health and alterations in the microbial composition of dental plaque when PDT is used alongside conventional treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

PDT offers a promising adjunctive treatment for periodontitis, with benefits in bacterial reduction, tissue healing, and immune modulation. This article highlights the potential of PDT in periodontal therapy and emphasizes the need for further research to refine its clinical application and efficacy.

Managing Oral Health in the Context of Antimicrobial Resistance

The oral microbiome plays a major role in shaping oral health/disease state; thus, a main challenge for dental practitioners is to preserve or restore a balanced oral microbiome. Nonetheless, when pathogenic microorganisms install in the oral cavity and are incorporated into the oral biofilm, oral infections, such as gingivitis, dental caries, periodontitis, and peri-implantitis, can arise. Several prophylactic and treatment approaches are available nowadays, but most of them have been antibiotic-based. Given the actual context of antimicrobial resistance (AMR), antibiotic stewardship in dentistry would be a beneficial approach to optimize and avoid inappropriate or even unnecessary antibiotic use, representing a step towards precision medicine. Furthermore, the development of new effective treatment options to replace the need for antibiotics is being pursued, including the application of photodynamic therapy and the use of probiotics. In this review, we highlight the advances undergoing towards a better understanding of the oral microbiome and oral resistome. We also provide an updated overview of how dentists are adapting to better manage the treatment of oral infections given the problem of AMR.