Chala Marianna, Anagnostaki Eugenia, Mylona Valina, Chalas Anastasios, Parker Steven, Lynch Edward
Department of Surgical Sciences and Integrated Diagnostics, University of Genoa, 16132 Genoa, Italy.
Leicester School of Pharmacy, De Montfort University, Leicester LE1 9BH, UK.
Dent J (Basel). 2020 Jul 3;8(3):68. doi: 10.3390/dj8030068.
The aim of this systematic review is to compare the effectiveness of lasers in the treatment of implant mucositis and peri-implantitis compared to conventional treatment (non-surgical or surgical: resective or regenerative).
Sources of PubMed, Cochrane and Google Scholar search engines were used on articles published from 1997 to 2020 in English, with selected keyword criteria applied. Nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected.
All included studies were considered of "high quality" according to the quality assessment scale. The comparative assessment of the RCTs was done twice for each RCT based on the type of treatment and according to wavelength. There is strong scientific evidence that, regarding non-surgical treatment, adjunct laser application can provide better results only in the short term (three months). Regarding the surgical approach, the method of decontamination plays a subordinate role. All wavelengths/applications presented similar results.
Within the limitations of this study, the adjunctive use of lasers in the treatment of peri-implant inflammation is effective for up to three months; there is no strong evidence regarding the long term benefit compared to conventional treatment.
本系统评价的目的是比较激光治疗种植体周围黏膜炎和种植体周围炎与传统治疗（非手术或手术：切除性或再生性）的有效性。
使用PubMed、Cochrane和谷歌学术搜索引擎，检索1997年至2020年发表的英文文章，并应用选定的关键词标准。选取了9项随机对照试验（RCT）。
根据质量评估量表，所有纳入研究均被认为“高质量”。基于治疗类型并根据波长，对每个RCT进行了两次RCT的比较评估。有强有力的科学证据表明，对于非手术治疗，辅助激光应用仅在短期内（三个月）能提供更好的效果。关于手术方法，去污方法起次要作用。所有波长/应用均呈现相似结果。
在本研究的局限性内，激光辅助治疗种植体周围炎症在长达三个月内有效；与传统治疗相比，没有强有力的证据表明其长期益处。
