The effectiveness of low-level laser therapy as an adjunct to non-surgical periodontal treatment: a meta-analysis
Ren C, McGrath C, Jin L, Zhang C, Yang Y
Journal of periodontal research · 60 citations
How it was studied
- Design
- Meta-analysis (indexed by PubMed)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Health markers and function
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Independent funding
- Government
- Health and Medical Research Fund
- Grants
- Health and Medical Research Fund (01121056)
Based on 1 listed funder(s) and full-text disclosure statement.
Publication
- Published
- 2016-03-02 · J Periodontal Res · vol. 52 · issue 1 · pp. 8–20
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Cited
- 99 citations · more than 91% of similar papers · 3.4× the field average
- Impact
- Top 10% most cited in its field
- References
- 50 works
- Access
- Open access (hybrid journal) · CC-BY
- Research areas
- Laser Applications in Dentistry and Medicine · Oral microbiology and periodontitis research · Periodontal Regeneration and Treatments
- Keywords
- Medicine, Meta-analysis, Randomized controlled trial, Scaling and root planing, Cochrane Library, Blinding, Dentistry, Low level laser therapy, Dental alveolus, Adjunct, MEDLINE, Relative risk, Laser therapy, Periodontitis, Chronic periodontitis, Surgery, Internal medicine, Confidence interval
- MeSH
- humans, periodontitis, combined modality therapy, dental scaling, root planing, low-level light therapy
5 authors
From HK, US
- Chong RenChinese University of Hong Kong; University of Hong Kong
- Colman P. J. McGrathChinese University of Hong Kong; University of Hong Kong
- Lijian JinChinese University of Hong Kong; University of Hong Kong
- C ZhangChinese University of Hong Kong; University of Hong Kong
- Yanqi Yang · correspondingChinese University of Hong Kong; In-Q-Tel; University of Hong Kong
Abstract
Background and objectives
Although low-level laser therapy (LLLT) has been demonstrated to have a biomodulatory effect on periodontal tissue, no systematic review has exclusively addressed its effectiveness as an adjunct to non-surgical periodontal treatment. This study aimed to evaluate whether an additional benefit exists for the application of LLLT compared with scaling and root planing (SRP) alone.
Material and methods
An extensive search was conducted in the Cochrane Library (Issue 8, 2015), PubMed (1997) and EMBASE (1947) before August 2015 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The bias risk was assessed with the Cochrane tool for risk of bias evaluation. A meta-analysis was performed using REVMAN 5.3.
Results
After independent screening of 354 initial records, eight publications (seven RCTs) were included. However, six were rated as 'having a high risk of bias' as a result of major methodological weakness in 'allocation concealment' and 'blinding of key personnel'. Meta-analysis showed that LLLT-mediated SRP demonstrated significant short-term benefits over SRP monotherapy in the improvement of the probing pocket depth (p = 0.0009 at 1 mo; p = 0.03 at 2 mo) and the level of interleukin-1β in the gingival crevicular fluid (p = 0.01 at 1 mo). Nevertheless, LLLT failed to show significant additional intermediate-term (3 and 6 mo) effects in terms of clinical parameters and alveolar bone density.
Conclusion
These findings indicated that LLLT showed only short-term additional benefits after conventional SRP. Its long-term effects remain unclear due to substantial methodological weaknesses and an insufficient number of current studies. Future RCTs with better designs and longer follow-up periods are required to assess the effectiveness of LLLT as an adjunctive treatment strategy in patients with periodontal disease.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher (CC BY).
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething wrong here?
Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.