ABSTRACT
This study aims to investigate the therapeutic value of 660 nm light-emitting diode (LED) light irradiation on the strategies for treating experimental periodontal intrabony defects in vivo. Large-sized periodontal intrabony defects were created bilaterally on the mesial aspect of the maxillary second molars of 48 Sprague-Dawley rats, and the rats were equally divided into four treatment groups with primary wound intention (n = 6/treatment/time point), including open flap debridement alone (OD), barrier membrane alone (MB), xenograft alone (BG), and xenograft plus barrier membrane (MG). Each group received daily 0 or 10 J/cm(2) LED light irradiation. The animals were sacrificed after 1 or 4 weeks. The treatment outcome was evaluated by gross observation of wound dehiscence and healing, micro-CT imaging for osteogenesis, and histological assessments for inflammatory cell infiltration and periodontal reattachment. With LED light irradiation, the extent of wound dehiscence was reduced, wound closure was accelerated, epithelial downgrowth was prevented, inflammation was reduced, and periodontal reattachment was promoted in all treatment strategies. Significant reduction of inflammation with LED light irradiation was noted at 1 week in the groups BG and MG (p < 0.05). Osteogenesis was significantly promoted only in the group OD at both time points (p < 0.05). Our study showed that 660 nm LED light accelerates mucoperiosteal flap healing and periodontal reattachment. However, the enhancement of osteogenesis appeared to be limited while simultaneously treating with a barrier membrane or xenograft.
Subject(s)
Lasers, Semiconductor/therapeutic use , Low-Level Light Therapy/methods , Periodontal Diseases/radiotherapy , Animals , Male , Osteogenesis/radiation effects , Rats , Rats, Sprague-Dawley , Wound Healing/radiation effectsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Immediate implantation, despite many advantages, carries a risk of gingival recession, papilla loss, collapse of ridge contour, and other esthetic complications. Soft tissue graft placement combined with immediate implantation may be used to reduce these concerns. This review aims to systematically analyze clinical esthetic outcomes of the immediate implant combined with soft tissue graft (IMITG). METHODS: The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines for systematic reviews were used. The electronic search was conducted using MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from January 1980 to October 2014. Quality assessments of selected articles were performed. Mid-buccal gingival level, interproximal gingival level, facial gingival thickness, gingival ridge dimension, and width of keratinized gingiva were the esthetic outcomes reviewed. Weighted mean difference of mid-buccal gingival level (WDBGL), papilla index score (WDPIS), and width of keratinized gingiva (WDKG) between initial and last measurements were calculated. Other esthetic outcomes were assessed by the descriptive analysis. RESULTS: Ten studies with a minimum of 6-month follow-up were included, and reported esthetic outcomes were analyzed. Mid-buccal gingival level (WDBGL, 0.07 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.44 to 0.59; P = 0.12) and interproximal gingival level did not significantly change after IMITG (WDPIS in the mesial site, 0.31; 95% CI = -0.01 to 0.64; P = 0.06; and WDPIS in the distal site, 0.29; 95% CI = -0.06 to 0.65; P = 0.11). Width of keratinized gingiva significantly increased after IMITG (WDKG, 1.27 mm; 95% CI = -0.08 to 2.46; P = 0.04). Facial gingival thickness and gingival ridge dimension could be increased after IMITG. CONCLUSIONS: Because of the heterogeneity and limited number of selected studies, no conclusive statement could be made regarding the benefit of IMITG on esthetic outcomes. More randomized controlled trials are needed to provide definite clinical evidence.
