PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: To assess both the clinical and immunological effectiveness of diode laser therapy when used as an adjunct to non-surgical mechanical therapy in managing peri-implantitis.
METHODS: A cohort of 27 participants, comprising 21 females and 6 males, agreed to take part in this investigation. 37 dental implants with peri-implantitis diagnosis were randomly allocated to either the laser group (n = 19) or the control group (n = 18). Evaluation of peri-implant clinical parameters and collection peri-implant crevicular fluid (PICF) samples occurred at baseline, as well as at 3 and 6-month follow-up intervals. The level of various biomarkers (TWEAK, IL-1β, sclerostin, IL-17, RANKL, OPG and IL-10) within the PICF were quantified using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.
RESULTS: Significant time-dependent decreases in clinical and biochemical parameters were detected in both groups compared to the baseline. There were marked differences between the groups in terms of periodontal parameters, except probing depth, and IL-1β, IL-17, sclerostin levels in PICF at 3rd month follow-up. However, no statistically significant difference was detected at 6th month.
CONCLUSIONS: Diode laser seems to be a reliable tool as an adjunct for supporting the nonsurgical mechanical treatment during the early stages of peri-implantitis. Furthermore, the findings suggest that IL-17, sclerostin and IL-1β may serve as promising biomarkers for assessing efficacy of peri-implantitis treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on these outcomes, clinicians may consider the application of adjunctive use of diode laser to non-surgical peri-implantitis treatment to achieve better clinical and immunological improvements than nonsurgical peri-implantitis therapy alone in just early healing period. However, it should be noted that there was no difference between the two methods in the long term.
METHODS: A cohort of 27 participants, comprising 21 females and 6 males, agreed to take part in this investigation. 37 dental implants with peri-implantitis diagnosis were randomly allocated to either the laser group (n = 19) or the control group (n = 18). Evaluation of peri-implant clinical parameters and collection peri-implant crevicular fluid (PICF) samples occurred at baseline, as well as at 3 and 6-month follow-up intervals. The level of various biomarkers (TWEAK, IL-1β, sclerostin, IL-17, RANKL, OPG and IL-10) within the PICF were quantified using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.
RESULTS: Significant time-dependent decreases in clinical and biochemical parameters were detected in both groups compared to the baseline. There were marked differences between the groups in terms of periodontal parameters, except probing depth, and IL-1β, IL-17, sclerostin levels in PICF at 3rd month follow-up. However, no statistically significant difference was detected at 6th month.
CONCLUSIONS: Diode laser seems to be a reliable tool as an adjunct for supporting the nonsurgical mechanical treatment during the early stages of peri-implantitis. Furthermore, the findings suggest that IL-17, sclerostin and IL-1β may serve as promising biomarkers for assessing efficacy of peri-implantitis treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on these outcomes, clinicians may consider the application of adjunctive use of diode laser to non-surgical peri-implantitis treatment to achieve better clinical and immunological improvements than nonsurgical peri-implantitis therapy alone in just early healing period. However, it should be noted that there was no difference between the two methods in the long term.
摘要：
目的：评估二极管激光治疗作为非手术机械治疗辅助治疗种植体周围炎的临床和免疫学有效性。
方法：27名参与者的队列，包括21名女性和6名男性，同意参加这次调查.37个诊断为种植体周围炎的牙种植体被随机分配到激光组（n=19）或对照组（n=18）。评估种植体周围的临床参数和收集种植体周围的泪液（PICF）样本发生在基线，以及3个月和6个月的随访间隔。各种生物标志物的水平(TWEAK，IL-1β,硬化蛋白,IL-17RANKL,使用酶联免疫吸附测定对PICF中的OPG和IL-10）进行定量。
结果：与基线相比，两组均检测到临床和生化参数的显着时间依赖性下降。在牙周参数方面，两组之间存在显着差异，除了探测深度,和IL-1β，随访3个月时PICF中IL-17、硬化蛋白水平。然而,6个月时无统计学差异.
结论：二极管激光似乎是支持种植体周围炎早期非手术机械治疗的可靠工具。此外，研究结果表明,IL-17,硬化蛋白和IL-1β可作为评估种植体周围炎治疗疗效的有前景的生物标志物.
结论：基于这些结果，临床医生可能会考虑将二极管激光辅助应用于非手术种植体周围炎治疗,以便在早期愈合期比单独的非手术种植体周围炎治疗获得更好的临床和免疫学改善.然而,应该注意的是，从长远来看，这两种方法没有区别。
方法：27名参与者的队列，包括21名女性和6名男性，同意参加这次调查.37个诊断为种植体周围炎的牙种植体被随机分配到激光组（n=19）或对照组（n=18）。评估种植体周围的临床参数和收集种植体周围的泪液（PICF）样本发生在基线，以及3个月和6个月的随访间隔。各种生物标志物的水平(TWEAK，IL-1β,硬化蛋白,IL-17RANKL,使用酶联免疫吸附测定对PICF中的OPG和IL-10）进行定量。
结果：与基线相比，两组均检测到临床和生化参数的显着时间依赖性下降。在牙周参数方面，两组之间存在显着差异，除了探测深度,和IL-1β，随访3个月时PICF中IL-17、硬化蛋白水平。然而,6个月时无统计学差异.
结论：二极管激光似乎是支持种植体周围炎早期非手术机械治疗的可靠工具。此外，研究结果表明,IL-17,硬化蛋白和IL-1β可作为评估种植体周围炎治疗疗效的有前景的生物标志物.
结论：基于这些结果，临床医生可能会考虑将二极管激光辅助应用于非手术种植体周围炎治疗,以便在早期愈合期比单独的非手术种植体周围炎治疗获得更好的临床和免疫学改善.然而,应该注意的是，从长远来看，这两种方法没有区别。
