Search

Background: Previous in vitro studies have proven laser fluorescence measurement using a 655-nm Indium Gallium Arsenide Phosphide (InGaAsP) based diode laser radiation to be a useful tool to detect subgingival calculus. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the 655-nm InGaAsP diode laser in detecting subgingival calculus in patients with periodontal disease compared with photographic assessment during periodontal surgery.Methods: Twelve patients (six women, six men) aged between 21 and 75 years with periodontitis scheduled for periodontal surgery were included in this prospective study. All laser fluorescence measurements were made before periodontal surgery. Intraoperatively a mucoperiostal flap was performed, subgingival calculus was visualized, and photographic images were taken. The presence of calculus was recorded for each evaluated site.Results: A total of 115 tooth surface sites of 32 teeth from the 12 patients were evaluated before (laser) and during surgery (image). Compared with image evaluation the laser assessment showed a sensitivity of 0.70 (CI0.025 0.53 to CI0.975 0.83) and a specificity of 0.97 (CI0.025 0.85 to CI0.975 0.99). The overall probability to correctly detect subgingival calculus with the laser (accuracy) was 0.82 (CI0.025 0.74 to CI0.975 0.88).Conclusions: The 655-nm diode laser was able to detect subgingival calculus. Hence, the 655 nm diode laser may be used as an additional tool for calculus detection in non-surgical periodontal therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Photoactivated disinfection (PAD) could support the periodontal treatment outcome. The effect of the light emitting diode (LED) as an innovative light source in PAD is under discussion. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and microbiological effect of adjunctive PAD in the treatment of periodontitis with a red LED as light source.Methods: Twenty patients with periodontitis completed this split-mouth study. The left and right side of the jaws were randomly assigned to either test or control group. After conservative periodontal treatment in both groups, the test group received two sessions of adjunctive PAD (red LED, 635 nm, photosensitive dye, 0.01% tolonium chloride), whereas the control group received no adjunctive PAD. The parameters of clinical periodontal examination-including probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), bleeding on probing (BOP) and microbiological assays (PCR) were evaluated before and after treatment.Results: After 3 months, both treatment groups showed significant improvements regarding BOP, PD, and CAL compared to baseline, with no significant difference between control and treatment group. The recolonization of Porphyromonas gingivalis and Treponema denticola was reduced after adjuvant treatment, but not significantly.Conclusions: The positive effect of adjunctive PAD regarding clinical parameters was reported in recent trials. In this study and with the current settings, both treatment groups showed similar clinical results after initial periodontal treatment, without beneficial effect of adjunctive PAD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]