Two-year clinical outcomes following non-surgical mechanical therapy of peri-implantitis with adjunctive diode laser application

2015 ◽  
Vol 27 (7) ◽  
pp. 845-849 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gérald R. Mettraux ◽  
Anton Sculean ◽  
Walter B. Bürgin ◽  
Giovanni E. Salvi
2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Giulia M. Mariani ◽  
Elena Ercoli ◽  
Nicoletta Guzzi ◽  
Loretta Bongiovanni ◽  
Laura Bianco ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Ali Tugrul Gur ◽  
Guliz N. Guncu ◽  
Abdullah C. Akman ◽  
Asli Pinar ◽  
Erdem Karabulut ◽  
...  

2010 ◽  
Vol 24 (9) ◽  
pp. 689-698
Author(s):  
Andrzej Klimpel ◽  
Damian Janicki ◽  
Aleksander Lisiecki ◽  
Ziemowit Wilk

Author(s):  
Bellia Loredana ◽  
Ruggiero Roberta ◽  
Nicolò Michele

Mechanical surface treatment and removal of the above and subgingival biofilm (Tartar ablation; SRP) are considered the most suitable tools for the treatment of periodontal inflammatory diseases, with the aim of destroying bacterial bioflim, reducing bacteria, and slowing down recolonization by pathogenic microorganisms. Often, however, the only S&RP are not enough, as there are patients who are experiencing relapses. Recently, laser therapy has been suggested as a potential tool to improve the outcome of periodontal non-surgical treatment. The objective of the following study was to evaluate the clinical healing of periodontal pockets treated with mechanical therapy, scaling and root planing, and diode laser application, compared to that obtained with non-surgical mechanical therapy alone. The study was designed as a randomized controlled clinical trial. Patients in the control group (13 patients) underwent conventional non-surgical therapy only, while patients in the test group (17 patients) were associated with conventional non-surgical treatment, a laser irradiation session. At baseline and after 6 months, the parameters of probing depth (PD), bleeding on probing (BOP), gingival recession (REC) were assessed The main variable of this study was the PD (probing depth) FMPS and FMBS at follow-up improved in both groups. The FMPS baseline test group 32.59 ± 6.74 - follow up 12.00 ± 3.16. The baseline of the control group showed 33.00 ± 9.55, the follow up 13.15 ± 4.85 The FMBS baseline test group found 24.29 ± 5.01 while at follow 9.65 ± 2.69. The baseline control group 30.31 ± 7.74, Follow up 11.08 ± 2.33. There is a statistical significance. (P.VALUE 0.0001) There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of PD, CAL and BOP at baseline and at follow-up. PD Test group 4,89±1,58 3,95±0,85 0,0001 Control group 5,02±1,57 4,01±0,86 CAL (mm)Test group 0,89±2,29 0,77±1,91 Control group 0,28±1,38 0,24±1,14 REC Test group 0,19±0,49 0,19±0,51 Control group 0,06±0,29 0,57±029 BOP Test group 51,2% 23,5% Control group 54,0% 20,9% The results showed differences in both baseline and follow-up for REC. Test group 0,19±0,49 0,19±0,51-Control group0,06±0,29 0,57±029 In intra-group analyzes, there are differences between baseline and follow-up for all values, except for REC in the control group. The diode laser can be used as an appropriate device for periodontal treatments, but it can offer additional and significant benefits if used according to appropriate protocols and parameters, and especially if associated with non-surgical, manual and ultrasound periodontal instrumentation, always site-specific , as it is a tool that does not replace traditional methods.


2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (5) ◽  
pp. 429-438 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mario Aimetti ◽  
Giulia Maria Mariani ◽  
Francesco Ferrarotti ◽  
Elena Ercoli ◽  
Chun Ching Liu ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Suné Mulder-van Staden ◽  
Haly Holmes ◽  
Jos Hille

AbstractAssessment of the efficacy of a single 810 nm diode laser application as an adjunctive treatment modality during the first intervention of non-surgical periodontal therapy (NPT). 25 patients diagnosed with chronic periodontitis underwent a split-mouth randomised control trial. The periodontal pockets of the test quadrants were treated with an 810 nm diode laser as an adjunct to NPT (Picasso GaAlAs; AMD Lasers). The laser was set at 1.0 W continuous wave, 400 µm tip, 796 W/cm2 peak power density and a 32 J/cm2 energy density. Therapeutic outcomes were evaluated based on the clinical parameters, which included probing pocket depth, recession, clinical attachment level, full mouth plaque score, full mouth bleeding on probing and tooth mobility. The baseline bacterial collection was completed from the periodontal pockets and then re-evaluated at 6 weeks. Clinical parameters demonstrated no statistical difference, with the exception of a statistically significant (P < 0.05) reduction in bleeding on probing for the test side. The test side resulted in a statistical increase of Capnocytophagaspecies and Treponemadenticola. The single application of the diode laser did not significantly improve the bacterial nor the clinical parameters in patients with chronic periodontitis.Trial registration number: PACTR201909915338276.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document