Are lasers as effective as scaling for chronic periodontitis?

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), CINAHL, Science Direct, ISI Web of Science, and SCOPUS. The following journals were hand searched: Journal of Periodontology, International Journal of Periodontics and Restorative Dentistry, Journal of Clinical Periodontology, Journal of Dental Research, Journal of Periodontal Research, Periodontology 2000, Journal of Dentistry, Journal of American Dental Associations, Journal of Clinical Dentistry, Lasers in Medical Science, Lasers in Surgery and Medicine, Clinical Oral Investigations, and Photomedicine and Laser Surgery as well as the reference lists of included articles.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) comparing Er:YAG laser with manual or ultrasonic SRP alone were included. No language restrictions were applied.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data were collected by two independent reviewers with only numeric data being extracted. Data were combined for meta-analysis with the effect size being estimated and reported as the mean difference (MD) for continuous variables using a random effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using the ÷2-based Q-statistic method and I(2) measurement.

RESULTS

Five trials met the inclusion criteria. Five trials (85 patients and 3,564 sites) were entered in the meta-analysis to investigate clinical attachment level (CAL) gain, pocket depth (PD) reduction and gingival recession (GR). All studies reported significant intragroup improvement in clinical and microbiological parameters in patients treated with the Er:YAG laser. However, three studies did not report a significant difference between Er:YAG laser and SRP groups in CAL gain, PD reduction or GR changes. The meta-analysis revealed no significant differences for any investigated parameters at six and 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant heterogeneity, a high risk of bias in three of the five included studies, and methodological shortcomings indicate that the results should be considered with caution. Future long-term, well-designed RCTs are needed to assess the scientific evidence of Er:YAG laser efficacy as an alternative treatment strategy to SRP.