Department of Prosthetic Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia.
Photodiagnosis Photodyn Ther. 2018 Jun;22:132-136. doi: 10.1016/j.pdpdt.2018.03.002. Epub 2018 Mar 15.
There are no studies that have assessed the effectiveness of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) in reducing peri-implant inflammatory response in individuals vaping electronic cigarettes (e-cigs). This study explored the effectiveness of aPDT as an adjunct to mechanical debridement (MD) in the treatment of peri-implant mucositis (p-iM) in individuals vaping e-cigs.
Vaping individuals with p-iM were divided into 2 groups: (a) Group-I: receiving MD with aPDT (test group); and (b) Group-II: MD only (control group). Peri-implant inflammatory parameters including plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BoP), and pocket depth (PD) were assessed at baseline and 12-weeks follow-up. Inter- and intra-group comparisons were made using Mann-Whitney U test and Wilcoxon signed ranks test. P-value < 0.05 was considered significant.
Thirty-eight male patients (20 in Group-I and 18 in Group-II) were included. The mean age of vaping individuals in groups I and II were 33.6 ± 2.8 and 35.4 ± 2.1 years, respectively. Mean daily frequency of vaping e-cigs in groups I and II was 7.3 ± 0.9 and 5.9 ± 1.0 whereas mean duration of vaping e-cigs was 4.8 ± 1.5 and 4.1 ± 1.3 years respectively. There was no significant difference between groups at baseline. There was significant improvement in PI (p < 0.001) and PD (p < 0.001) at 12-weeks follow-up with respect to the baseline visit in both groups. There was a significant reduction in PI (p < 0.001) and PD (p < 0.001) for group-I as compared to group-II at follow-up. There was no statistically significant difference for BoP between groups at follow-up.
Antimicrobial PDT is more effective compared to MD alone in the treatment of p-iM in individuals vaping e-cigs. The findings of the present study should be considered preliminary and interpreted with caution. Further randomized clinical trials should be performed in order to obtain strong conclusions.
目前尚无研究评估抗菌光动力疗法（aPDT）在减轻电子烟使用者种植体周围炎症反应方面的有效性。本研究旨在探索 aPDT 作为机械清创术（MD）辅助治疗电子烟使用者种植体周围黏膜炎（p-iM）的有效性。
将患有 p-iM 的电子烟使用者分为两组：（a）组 I：接受 MD 联合 aPDT（试验组）；（b）组 II：仅接受 MD（对照组）。在基线和 12 周随访时，评估种植体周围炎症参数，包括菌斑指数（PI）、探诊出血（BoP）和牙周袋深度（PD）。使用 Mann-Whitney U 检验和 Wilcoxon 符号秩检验进行组间和组内比较。P 值<0.05 被认为具有统计学意义。
共纳入 38 名男性患者（组 I 20 名，组 II 18 名）。组 I 和组 II 电子烟使用者的平均年龄分别为 33.6±2.8 岁和 35.4±2.1 岁。组 I 和组 II 电子烟使用者的平均每日吸烟频率分别为 7.3±0.9 和 5.9±1.0 支，平均吸烟时间分别为 4.8±1.5 和 4.1±1.3 年。两组在基线时无统计学差异。两组在 12 周随访时的 PI（p<0.001）和 PD（p<0.001）与基线相比均有显著改善。与组 II 相比，组 I 的 PI（p<0.001）和 PD（p<0.001）在随访时显著降低。两组在随访时的 BoP 无统计学差异。
与单独使用 MD 相比，aPDT 治疗电子烟使用者的 p-iM 更有效。本研究结果应谨慎解释，并认为是初步的。需要进行更多的随机临床试验以得出有力的结论。
