4.6 Review

Effect of Different Laser Wavelengths on Periodontopathogens in Peri-Implantitis: A Review of In Vivo Studies

Journal

MICROORGANISMS
Volume 7, Issue 7, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms7070189

Keywords

laser; peri-implantitis; periodontopathogens; antimicrobial photodynamic therapy; decontamination; systematic review

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Nowadays, many studies are examining the effectiveness of dental lasers in the treatment of peri-implantitis; however, most of them only report periodontal parameter changes. The authors of this review tried to address the question: What is the effect of different laser wavelengths on oral bacteria that cause peri-implantitis? An electronic search of PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was performed. The following search terms were used: (peri-implantitis OR periimplantitis) OR/AND (microbial OR microbiologic) AND (laser OR Er:YAG OR erbium OR diode OR Nd:YAG OR neodymium-doped OR Er,Cr:YSGG OR chromium-doped). Initially, 212 studies were identified. After screening the titles and abstracts and excluding studies according to predefined inclusion criteria, seven publications were included in the review. Three studies about the effect of aPDT (antimicrobial photodynamic therapy) reported a decrease in the different bacterial strains associated with peri-implantitis, e.g., A. actinomycetemcomitans, P. gingivalis, P. intermedia, T. denticola, T. forsythia, F. nucleatum, and C. rectus. Two studies showed that the high-power diode laser may have some effect on peri-implant pathogens. Two articles about the Er:YAG laser reported a lowering in the count of oral pathogens; however, it was hard to determine if this was due to the use of the laser. aPDT has the ability to decrease the count of peri-implant pathogens, whereas Er:YAG laser application shows no significant effect on oral bacteria in the long term.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available