Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran.
Orthodontic Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Shahed University, Tehran, Iran.
J Orofac Orthop. 2024 Mar;85(2):110-122. doi: 10.1007/s00056-022-00427-1. Epub 2022 Sep 21.
The use non-invasive or minimally invasive methods to accelerate orthodontic tooth movements (OTM) is desirable. In this regard, low-level laser therapy (LLLT, photobiomodulation) and piezocision are suggested. However, because the efficacies of these methods remain controversial/inconclusive, we investigated and compared these two methods.
Sixty-four quadrants in 32 patients were randomized into three parallel intervention groups of 22, 22, and 20 (6 parallel arms, n = 64 treatment/control sides). Bilateral first premolars were extracted and canine retraction commenced. In each group, one side of the mouth was randomly selected as control, while the other side underwent each of three interventions: LLLT (940 nm, 8 J, 0.5 W, 16 s, 12 sites), piezocision, and "LLLT + piezocision". At the 3rd, 6th, and 9th follow-up weeks, canine retraction and anchorage loss were measured. Data were analyzed statistically (α = 0.05).
After 9 weeks, LLLT, piezocision, and LLLT + piezocision improved canine retraction by 0.51, 1.14, and 1.93 mm, respectively. LLLT accelerated canine retraction (compared to control) by 1.6-, 1.4-, and 1.2-fold in the 3rd, 6th, and 9th week, respectively. These statistics were 2.1-, 1.7-, and 1.5-fold for piezocision and 2.7-, 2.1-, and 1.8-fold for LLLT + piezocision. Compared to controls, each intervention showed significant retraction acceleration (p < 0.05). The effect of LLLT + piezocision was greater than that of isolated piezocision (p < 0.05), which itself was greater than that for isolated LLLT (p < 0.05).
All three methods accelerated OTM, with the combination of LLLT + piezocision producing the strongest and LLLT producing the weakest acceleration.
使用非侵入性或微创方法来加速正畸牙齿移动(OTM)是可取的。在这方面,低水平激光疗法(LLLT,光生物调节)和 Piezocision 被推荐。然而,由于这些方法的疗效仍然存在争议/不确定,我们调查并比较了这两种方法。
32 名患者的 64 象限被随机分为三个平行干预组,每组 22、22 和 20 个(6 个平行臂,n=64 个治疗/对照侧)。双侧第一前磨牙被拔除,尖牙开始回收。在每组中,一侧口腔被随机选为对照,而另一侧接受三种干预中的每一种:LLLT(940nm,8J,0.5W,16s,12 个部位)、Piezocision 和“LLLT+Piezocision”。在第 3、6 和 9 次随访周时,测量尖牙回收和支抗丧失。数据进行了统计学分析(α=0.05)。
9 周后,LLLT、Piezocision 和 LLLT+Piezocision 分别使尖牙回收改善了 0.51、1.14 和 1.93mm。LLLT 在第 3、6 和 9 周分别使尖牙回收加速了 1.6、1.4 和 1.2 倍。这些统计数据在 Piezocision 方面分别为 2.1、1.7 和 1.5 倍,在 LLLT+Piezocision 方面分别为 2.7、2.1 和 1.8 倍。与对照组相比,每种干预措施都显示出明显的回收加速(p<0.05)。LLLT+Piezocision 的效果大于单独的 Piezocision(p<0.05),而单独的 LLLT 的效果大于单独的 Piezocision(p<0.05)。
所有三种方法都加速了 OTM,其中 LLLT+Piezocision 的效果最强,LLLT 的效果最弱。