Katz Marie Sophie, Ooms Mark, Heitzer Marius, Winnand Philipp, Bock Anna, Klein Maurice, Hölzle Frank, Modabber Ali
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstraße 30, Aachen, Germany.
BMC Oral Health. 2025 Jul 31;25(1):1290. doi: 10.1186/s12903-025-06608-9.
The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate whether laser Doppler flowmetry (LDF) as a diagnostic tool is effective in detecting gingival inflammation.
This review was conducted and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (registration number CRD42025633576). Two authors independently performed searches in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Scopus.
In total, 1317 studies were identified, of which 10 met the inclusion criteria after full-text screening. All studies compared perfusion with a healthy control group, seven included a gingivitis group, five included patients with periodontitis, and none included patients with peri-implant disease. Higher blood flow values were found in patients with chronic gingivitis compared to healthy controls, while patients with experimental gingivitis showed no significant difference. Blood flow values in patients with periodontitis showed controversial results.
LDF shows potential utility in detecting chronic gingival inflammation and altered perfusion patterns between healthy individuals and those with gingival or periodontal inflammation. However, reliably grading perfusion across disease stages and distinguishing between acute gingivitis and chronic periodontitis remains challenging. Notably, there is a lack of data regarding the use of LDF in peri-implant tissues, representing a significant gap in current research. At present, established clinical parameters such as probing depth and bleeding on probing (BOP), remain the gold standard in routine periodontal diagnostics.
本系统评价的目的是评估激光多普勒血流仪（LDF）作为一种诊断工具在检测牙龈炎症方面是否有效。
本评价按照系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目（PRISMA）进行并报告，并在国际前瞻性系统评价注册库（PROSPERO）注册（注册号CRD42025633576）。两位作者独立在PubMed、Embase、Cochrane图书馆和Scopus中进行检索。
共识别出1317项研究，其中10项在全文筛选后符合纳入标准。所有研究均将灌注情况与健康对照组进行比较，7项纳入了牙龈炎组，5项纳入了牙周炎患者，无一纳入种植体周围疾病患者。与健康对照组相比，慢性牙龈炎患者的血流值更高，而实验性牙龈炎患者则无显著差异。牙周炎患者的血流值结果存在争议。
LDF在检测慢性牙龈炎症以及区分健康个体与牙龈或牙周炎症个体之间的灌注模式改变方面显示出潜在效用。然而，可靠地对疾病各阶段的灌注进行分级以及区分急性牙龈炎和慢性牙周炎仍然具有挑战性。值得注意的是，目前缺乏关于LDF在种植体周围组织中应用的数据，这是当前研究中的一个重大空白。目前，诸如探诊深度和探诊出血（BOP）等既定的临床参数仍是常规牙周诊断的金标准。
