UNLABELLED: The aim of this systematic review is to compare the clinical outcomes of lasers with other commonly applied detoxification methods for treating peri-implantitis. An electronic search of four databases and a hand search of peer-reviewed journals for relevant articles were conducted. Comparative human clinical trials and case series with ≥ 6 months of follow-up in ≥ 10 patients with peri-implantitis treated with lasers were included. Additionally, animal studies applying lasers for treating peri-implantitis were also included. The included studies had to report probing depth (PD) reduction after the therapy. RESULTS: Seven human prospective clinical trials and two animal studies were included. In four and three human studies, lasers were accompanied with surgical and non-surgical treatments, respectively. The meta-analyses showed an overall weighted mean difference of 0.00 mm (95% confidence interval = -0.18 to 0.19 mm) PD reduction between the laser and conventional treatment groups (P = 0.98) for non-surgical intervention. In animal studies, laser-treated rough-surface implants had a higher percentage of bone-to-implant contact than smooth-surface implants. In a short-term follow-up, lasers resulted in similar PD reduction when compared with conventional implant surface decontamination methods.
UNLABELLED: The aim of this systematic review is to compare the clinical outcomes of lasers with other commonly applied detoxification methods for treating peri-implantitis. An electronic search of four databases and a hand search of peer-reviewed journals for relevant articles were conducted. Comparative human clinical trials and case series with ≥ 6 months of follow-up in ≥ 10 patients with peri-implantitis treated with lasers were included. Additionally, animal studies applying lasers for treating peri-implantitis were also included. The included studies had to report probing depth (PD) reduction after the therapy. RESULTS: Seven human prospective clinical trials and two animal studies were included. In four and three human studies, lasers were accompanied with surgical and non-surgical treatments, respectively. The meta-analyses showed an overall weighted mean difference of 0.00 mm (95% confidence interval = -0.18 to 0.19 mm) PD reduction between the laser and conventional treatment groups (P = 0.98) for non-surgical intervention. In animal studies, laser-treated rough-surface implants had a higher percentage of bone-to-implant contact than smooth-surface implants. In a short-term follow-up, lasers resulted in similar PD reduction when compared with conventional implant surface decontamination methods.
Authors: Lei Cheng; Hai-Yang Yu; Yao Wu; Chong-Yun Bao; Bang-Cheng Yang; Yi Man; Yao Sun; Xiao-Li Yan; Xue-Dong Zhou Journal: Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi Date: 2019-02-01