Cheng Zhexian, Li Wei, Wang Jitian, Huang Xuan, Jia Xingyuan, Zhou Xuan
Department of Stomatology, Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Department of Preventive Dentistry, Affiliated Stomatology Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
J Periodontol. 2025 Mar;96(3):203-216. doi: 10.1002/JPER.24-0128. Epub 2024 Aug 26.
To compare the efficacy of combined treatment of Er:YAG laser (ERL) and low-level laser therapy (LLLT) with single laser applications, and scaling and root planing (SRP) for non-surgical periodontal treatment.
In a randomized controlled trial, 25 non-smoking Stage II or Stage III periodontitis patients were recruited. The four intraoral quadrants were randomly assigned to four different treatments: (1) combined application with ERL plus SRP plus LLLT; (2) ERL plus SRP; (3) SRP plus LLLT; and (4) SRP. We assessed periodontal indexes, including probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), bleeding index (BI), and plaque index (PLI), along with three cytokines (IL-1β, TNF-α, IL-10) from gingival crevicular fluid and red complex pathogens from subgingival dental plaque at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months.
For initial moderate pockets (4 mm ≤ PD ≤ 6 mm), quadrants treated with ERL+SRP+LLLT, ERL+SRP, and SRP+LLLT exhibited greater PD improvement compared to the control (SRP) quadrants at the 3-month follow-up (1.25 ± 1.06, 1.23 ± 1.12, 1.00 ± 1.21 vs. 0.98 ± 1.21 mm) and the 6-month follow-up (1.35 ± 1.06, 1.23 ± 1.17, 1.35 ± 0.98 vs. 0.98 ± 1.23 mm) (p = 0.002). Quadrants treated with ERL+SRP+LLLT and SRP+LLLT showed more CAL gain means than the control quadrants at the 3-month follow-up (0.96 ± 1.42, 0.61 ± 1.39 vs. 0.55 ± 1.57 mm) and the 6-month follow-up (0.84 ± 1.54, 0.89 ± 1.49 vs. 0.48 ± 1.68 mm) (p = 0.008). For initial deep pockets (PD ≥ 7 mm), the ERL+SRP+LLLT quadrants had more PD improvement and CAL gain compared to the control quadrants at follow-up. There were no significant differences in BI, PLI, inflammatory cytokines, and periodontal pathogens among the four groups.
The combined application of ERL and LLLT demonstrated potential efficacy in reducing PD, particularly for deep pockets.
To compare the therapy effect of combined use of Er:YAG laser (ERL) and low level laser therapy (LLLT) with single laser applications, and traditional periodontal treatment (SRP). A total of 25 non smoking patients with periodontitis were involved, and their mouths were divided into four sections, each receiving a different treatment: ERL+SRP+LLLT, ERL+SRP, SRP+LLLT, and SRP. Clinical indexes and laboratory indicators were assessed at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. After six months, for initial moderate pockets, combined laser group and single laser group showed better improvements than traditional group in reducing the depth of periodontal pockets and increasing attachment levels. But for initial deep pockets, only combined laser group showed better improvement than traditional group. There were no significant differences in bleeding, plaque, inflammation, or harmful bacterial levels among the groups. These findings suggest that the integration of Er:YAG laser and low level laser therapy into standard periodontal treatment may enhance the treatment's benefits in reducing pocket depth, especially for severe conditions.
比较铒激光(ERL)联合低强度激光治疗(LLLT)与单一激光应用以及龈上洁治和根面平整术(SRP)用于非手术性牙周治疗的疗效。
在一项随机对照试验中,招募了25名非吸烟的II期或III期牙周炎患者。将口腔内的四个象限随机分配至四种不同治疗:(1)ERL联合SRP联合LLLT;(2)ERL联合SRP;(3)SRP联合LLLT;以及(4)SRP。我们在基线、3个月和6个月时评估了牙周指标,包括探诊深度(PD)、临床附着水平(CAL)、出血指数(BI)和菌斑指数(PLI),以及龈沟液中的三种细胞因子(IL-1β、TNF-α、IL-10)和龈下牙菌斑中的红色复合体病原体。
对于初始中度牙周袋(4mm≤PD≤6mm),在3个月随访时(1.25±1.06、1.23±1.12、1.00±1.21 vs. 0.98±1.21mm)和6个月随访时(1.35±1.06、1.23±1.17、1.35±0.98 vs. 0.98±1.23mm),接受ERL+SRP+LLLT、ERL+SRP和SRP+LLLT治疗的象限与对照组(SRP)象限相比,PD改善更明显(p = 0.002)。在3个月随访时(0.96±1.42、0.61±1.39 vs. 0.55±1.57mm)和6个月随访时(0.84±1.54、0.89±1.49 vs. 0.48±1.68mm),接受ERL+SRP+LLLT和SRP+LLLT治疗的象限比对照组象限显示出更多的CAL增加均值(p = 0.008)。对于初始深度牙周袋(PD≥7mm),在随访时,ERL+SRP+LLLT象限与对照组象限相比,PD改善更多且CAL增加。四组之间在BI、PLI、炎性细胞因子和牙周病原体方面无显著差异。
ERL和LLLT的联合应用在减少PD方面显示出潜在疗效,尤其是对于深度牙周袋。
为比较铒激光(ERL)和低强度激光治疗(LLLT)联合使用与单一激光应用以及传统牙周治疗(SRP)的治疗效果。共纳入25名非吸烟牙周炎患者,其口腔被分为四个部分,各接受不同治疗:ERL+SRP+LLLT、ERL+SRP、SRP+LLLT和SRP。在基线、3个月和6个月时评估临床指标和实验室指标。六个月后,对于初始中度牙周袋,联合激光组和单一激光组在减少牙周袋深度和增加附着水平方面比传统组有更好的改善。但对于初始深度牙周袋,只有联合激光组比传统组有更好的改善。各组之间在出血、菌斑、炎症或有害细菌水平方面无显著差异。这些发现表明,将铒激光和低强度激光治疗纳入标准牙周治疗可能会增强治疗在减少牙周袋深度方面的益处,特别是对于严重情况。