PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis was conducted to assess the effectiveness of photodynamic therapy (PDT) as an adjunct to conventional mechanical debridement (CMD) for the management of peri-implant mucositis (p-iM).
METHODS: We systematically searched four databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating PDT + CMD for p-iM from their inception to March 13, 2023. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software.
RESULTS: Seven RCTs met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis revealed that PDT + CMD treatment was more effective than CMD alone in reducing probing depth (PD) (Mean Difference [MD]: -1.09, 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: -1.99 to -0.2, P = 0.02) and plaque index (PI) (MD: -2.06, 95% CI: -2.81 to -1.31, P < 0.00001). However, there was no statistically significant difference in the improvement of bleeding on probing (BOP) between the PDT + CMD groups and CMD groups (MD: -0.97, 95% CI: -2.81 to 0.88, P = 0.31).
CONCLUSIONS: Based on the current available evidence, this meta-analysis indicates that the addition of PDT to CMD significantly improves PD and PI compared to CMD alone in the treatment of p-iM. However, there is no significant difference in improving BOP.
METHODS: We systematically searched four databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating PDT + CMD for p-iM from their inception to March 13, 2023. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software.
RESULTS: Seven RCTs met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis revealed that PDT + CMD treatment was more effective than CMD alone in reducing probing depth (PD) (Mean Difference [MD]: -1.09, 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: -1.99 to -0.2, P = 0.02) and plaque index (PI) (MD: -2.06, 95% CI: -2.81 to -1.31, P < 0.00001). However, there was no statistically significant difference in the improvement of bleeding on probing (BOP) between the PDT + CMD groups and CMD groups (MD: -0.97, 95% CI: -2.81 to 0.88, P = 0.31).
CONCLUSIONS: Based on the current available evidence, this meta-analysis indicates that the addition of PDT to CMD significantly improves PD and PI compared to CMD alone in the treatment of p-iM. However, there is no significant difference in improving BOP.
摘要：
目的：本荟萃分析旨在评估光动力疗法（PDT）作为常规机械清创（CMD）辅助治疗种植体周围黏膜炎（p-iM）的有效性。
方法：我们系统地搜索了四个数据库(PubMed，Embase,WebofScience,和CochraneLibrary）用于研究从开始到2023年3月13日的p-iM的PDTCMD的随机对照试验（RCT）。采用RevMan5.4软件进行Meta分析。
结果：7项随机对照试验符合纳入标准。荟萃分析显示，PDT+CMD治疗在降低探查深度（PD）（平均差[MD]：-1.09，95％置信区间[CI]：-1.99至-0.2，P=0.02）和菌斑指数（PI）（MD：-2.06，95％CI：-2.81至-1.31，P<0.00001）方面比单独使用CMD更有效。然而,PDT+CMD组与CMD组之间探查出血（BOP）的改善无统计学意义（MD：-0.97，95％CI：-2.81至0.88，P=0.31）。
结论：根据现有证据，这项荟萃分析表明,在p-iM治疗中,与单纯CMD相比,在CMD中加入PDT能显著改善PD和PI.然而,在改善BOP方面没有显著差异。
方法：我们系统地搜索了四个数据库(PubMed，Embase,WebofScience,和CochraneLibrary）用于研究从开始到2023年3月13日的p-iM的PDTCMD的随机对照试验（RCT）。采用RevMan5.4软件进行Meta分析。
结果：7项随机对照试验符合纳入标准。荟萃分析显示，PDT+CMD治疗在降低探查深度（PD）（平均差[MD]：-1.09，95％置信区间[CI]：-1.99至-0.2，P=0.02）和菌斑指数（PI）（MD：-2.06，95％CI：-2.81至-1.31，P<0.00001）方面比单独使用CMD更有效。然而,PDT+CMD组与CMD组之间探查出血（BOP）的改善无统计学意义（MD：-0.97，95％CI：-2.81至0.88，P=0.31）。
结论：根据现有证据，这项荟萃分析表明,在p-iM治疗中,与单纯CMD相比,在CMD中加入PDT能显著改善PD和PI.然而,在改善BOP方面没有显著差异。
