BACKGROUND: Currently, the most commonly used lasers for dental procedures are the Nd:YAG and CO2. Studies comparing healing of osteotomy defects prepared with rotary burs to those created by laser irradiation have reported conflicting results. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the histologic healing of bone in rat tibial osteotomy defects created either by a dental bur, CO2 laser with and without removal of the char layer, and Nd:YAG laser with char layer removed and with and without use of an air/water surface cooling spray. METHODS: Tibial osteotomy defects were created in 4 groups of 6 rats each using the following: 1) #6 round bur with simultaneous saline irrigation; 2) CO2 laser with char layer intact; 3) CO2 laser with char layer removed; 4) Nd:YAG laser with air/water surface cooling, and char layer intact; 5) Nd:YAG laser with air/water surface cooling, and char layer removed; and 6) Nd:YAG laser without air/water surface cooling, and char layer removed. Both laser types were used at energy densities typically utilized for oral soft tissue surgery. RESULTS: Progressive healing from day 0 through day 21 post-treatment was observed in all treatment groups. However, compared to controls treated by rotary dental bur, those specimens treated by laser, regardless of laser type, energy density, or other parameters, exhibited a delay in healing that appeared to be related to the presence of residual char in the osseous defect. Specimens treated with the Nd:YAG laser using an air/water surface coolant exhibited a decreased thickness and continuity of the char layer and yielded the only specimens with new bone formation at the surface of the laser ablation defect. In addition, the normal pattern of bone remodeling in the rat tibia appeared to have been altered by laser irradiation. CONCLUSIONS: In this animal model, laser-induced osteotomy defects, when compared to those prepared by rotary bur, exhibited a delayed healing response that appeared to be related to the presence of residual char in the osseous defect.
BACKGROUND: Currently, the most commonly used lasers for dental procedures are the Nd:YAG and CO2. Studies comparing healing of osteotomy defects prepared with rotary burs to those created by laser irradiation have reported conflicting results. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the histologic healing of bone in rattibial osteotomy defects created either by a dental bur, CO2 laser with and without removal of the char layer, and Nd:YAG laser with char layer removed and with and without use of an air/water surface cooling spray. METHODS:Tibial osteotomy defects were created in 4 groups of 6 rats each using the following: 1) #6 round bur with simultaneous saline irrigation; 2) CO2 laser with char layer intact; 3) CO2 laser with char layer removed; 4) Nd:YAG laser with air/water surface cooling, and char layer intact; 5) Nd:YAG laser with air/water surface cooling, and char layer removed; and 6) Nd:YAG laser without air/water surface cooling, and char layer removed. Both laser types were used at energy densities typically utilized for oral soft tissue surgery. RESULTS: Progressive healing from day 0 through day 21 post-treatment was observed in all treatment groups. However, compared to controls treated by rotary dental bur, those specimens treated by laser, regardless of laser type, energy density, or other parameters, exhibited a delay in healing that appeared to be related to the presence of residual char in the osseous defect. Specimens treated with the Nd:YAG laser using an air/water surface coolant exhibited a decreased thickness and continuity of the char layer and yielded the only specimens with new bone formation at the surface of the laser ablation defect. In addition, the normal pattern of bone remodeling in the rat tibia appeared to have been altered by laser irradiation. CONCLUSIONS: In this animal model, laser-induced osteotomy defects, when compared to those prepared by rotary bur, exhibited a delayed healing response that appeared to be related to the presence of residual char in the osseous defect.
Authors: Stephan Rupprecht; Katja Tangermann-Gerk; Joerg Wiltfang; Friedrich Wilhelm Neukam; Andreas Schlegel Journal: Lasers Med Sci Date: 2004 Impact factor: 3.161
Authors: Valéria Regina Gonzalez Sella; Fernando Russo Costa do Bomfim; Paula Carolina Dias Machado; Maria José Misael da Silva Morsoleto; Milton Chohfi; Helio Plapler Journal: Lasers Med Sci Date: 2015-01-18 Impact factor: 3.161
Authors: Nayer S AboElsaad; Mena Soory; Laila M A Gadalla; Laila I Ragab; Stephen Dunne; Khaled R Zalata; Chris Louca Journal: Lasers Med Sci Date: 2008-07-15 Impact factor: 3.161
Authors: Aline Rose Cantarelli Morosolli; Elaine Bauer Veeck; Walter Niccoli-Filho; Mônica Fernandes Gomes; Maria das Graças V Goulart Journal: Lasers Med Sci Date: 2009-04-30 Impact factor: 3.161
Authors: Johannes J Kuttenberger; Alessa Waibel; Stefan Stübinger; Martin Werner; Manfred Klasing; Mikhail Ivanenko; Peter Hering; Brigitte von Rechenberg; Robert Sader; Hans-Florian Zeilhofer Journal: Lasers Med Sci Date: 2009-08-13 Impact factor: 3.161
Authors: David D Lo; Mark A Mackanos; Michael T Chung; Jeong S Hyun; Daniel T Montoro; Monica Grova; Chunjun Liu; Jenny Wang; Daniel Palanker; Andrew J Connolly; Michael T Longaker; Christopher H Contag; Derrick C Wan Journal: Lasers Surg Med Date: 2012-11-26 Impact factor: 4.025