Department of Prosthetic Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Department of Prosthetic Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Photodiagnosis Photodyn Ther. 2018 Mar;21:147-152. doi: 10.1016/j.pdpdt.2017.11.011. Epub 2017 Nov 22.
The present study systematically reviewed the literature to investigate the effect of photodynamic therapy (PDT) or laser therapy (LT) in the management of peri-implant mucositis (p-iM).
The electronic databases were searched until October 2017. Outcome measures were bleeding on probing (BOP), plaque index (PI), or probing depth (PD). The addressed PICO question was: "Is PDT and LT effective in the management of p-iM?"
A total of five studies included in the qualitative analysis, two of which had a low risk of bias. Three studies used PDT while two studies used LT. All studies reported a significant improvement in clinical peri-implant inflammatory parameters in p-iM. For PDT, one study demonstrated a significant reduction for PDT group as compared to manual debridement (MD), while one study indicated comparable outcomes when tested with probiotics at follow-up. One study used PDT alone and indicated significant improvements in peri-implant parameters at follow-up. However, in the studies using LT, one study demonstrated a significant improvement in peri-implant parameters as compared to scaling and root planing alone, while other study indicated comparable outcomes when compared with manual debridement/chlorhexidine group at follow-up.
This systematic review demonstrated inconclusive findings to show the effect of PDT or LT in the management of p-iM due to methodological heterogeneity such as non-standard control groups, laser parameters and short follow-up period. The results of this review should be considered preliminary and further, more robust, well-designed studies with long-term follow up and standardized comparators with laser parameters are warranted.
本研究系统地回顾了文献,以调查光动力疗法(PDT)或激光疗法(LT)在治疗种植体周围黏膜炎(p-iM)中的作用。
电子数据库检索截至 2017 年 10 月。主要结局测量指标为探诊出血(BOP)、菌斑指数(PI)或探诊深度(PD)。提出的 PICO 问题是:“PDT 和 LT 在治疗 p-iM 方面是否有效?”
共有五项研究纳入定性分析,其中两项研究的偏倚风险较低。三项研究使用 PDT,两项研究使用 LT。所有研究均报告 p-iM 种植体周围炎症参数的临床改善具有统计学意义。对于 PDT,一项研究表明 PDT 组与手动清创术(MD)相比有显著降低,而另一项研究表明在随访时与益生菌相比结果相似。一项研究单独使用 PDT,并表明在随访时种植体周围参数有显著改善。然而,在使用 LT 的研究中,一项研究表明与单独的刮治和根面平整相比,种植体周围参数有显著改善,而另一项研究表明与手动清创术/洗必泰组相比结果相似。
由于方法学上的异质性,如非标准对照组、激光参数和较短的随访期,本系统评价的结果无法得出 PDT 或 LT 治疗 p-iM 的结论。本综述的结果应被认为是初步的,需要进一步进行更强大、设计良好、长期随访和具有标准化激光参数的比较的研究。