Laser therapy and conventional treatment of peri-implantitis
This summary is adapted from the Review Analysis and Evaluation published in the Journal of Evidence-Based Dental practice: Laser Therapy is Safe but not Superior to Conventional Treatment of Peri-implantitis (June 2015)
The Review Analysis and Evaluation examined a systematic review published in 2014 by Kotsakis, Konstantinidis, Karoussis, Ma, and Chu entitled: Systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of various laser wavelengths in the treatment of peri-implantitis.
Purpose of the Review
The investigation centered on the use of laser therapy as mono-therapy or as an adjunct in the treatment of peri-implantitis with a report of clinical indices of peri-implant disease, including clinical attachment level (CAL) and probing depth (PD).
- Based on the limited number of controlled clinical studies, any superiority of laser treatment in comparison to conventional treatment of peri-implantitis could not be definitively identified.
- However, non-surgical laser therapy may be investigated as phase I therapy for the treatment of peri-implantitis.
- There is limited clinical information on the application of CO2 lasers and surgical treatment for peri-implant defects in conjunction with bone grafting techniques; however, their use seems to be promising.
- The authors also emphasized that there is no information available regarding the efficacy of specific laser wavelengths.
- The review contributes to the evidence that lasers may be used as decontamination methods for the treatment of peri-implantitis.
- This study showed there is a distinct difference among various laser wavelengths (i.e., Er:YAG, CO2, or diode lasers) and clinical efficacy, thus underlining the importance of reporting laser characteristics such as wavelength, energy settings, and mode of application in future studies.
- There is no evidence for use of diode lasers (810 and 980 nm) and Nd:YAG laser in the treatment of peri-implant diseases. Potential risks, such as overheating of the implant body, may be the main reason for the lack of such studies.
References of Review Analysis and Evaluation