共 23 条
Periodontal treatment with an Er:YAG laser compared to ultrasonic instrumentation:: A pilot study
被引:66
作者:
Sculean, A
Schwarz, F
Berakdar, M
Romanos, GE
Arweiler, NB
Becker, J
机构:
[1] Univ Mainz, Dept Conservat Dent & Periodontol, D-55131 Mainz, Germany
[2] Univ Dusseldorf, Dept Oral Surg, D-4000 Dusseldorf, Germany
[3] Univ Frankfurt, Sch Dent, Dept Oral Surg & Implantol, Carolinum, D-6000 Frankfurt, Germany
[4] Univ Freiburg, Dept Conservat Biol & Periodontol, D-7800 Freiburg, Germany
关键词:
comparison studies;
lasers/therapeutic use;
periodontal diseases/therapy;
scaling;
D O I:
10.1902/jop.2004.75.7.966
中图分类号:
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号:
1003 ;
摘要:
Background: The aim of the present study was to compare the effectiveness of an Er:YAG laser to that of ultrasonic scaling for non-surgical periodontal treatment. Methods: Twenty patients with moderate to advanced periodontal disease were randomly treated in a split-mouth design with a single episode of subgingival debridement using either an Er:YAG laser device (160 mJ/pulse, 10 Hz) combined with a calculus detection system with fluorescence induced by 655 nm InGaAsP diode laser radiation (ERL), or an ultrasonic instrument (0). Clinical assessments of full-mouth plaque score (FMPS), bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), gingival recession (GR), and clinical attachment level (CAL) were made at baseline and at 3 and 6 months following therapy. Results: No differences in any of the investigated parameters were observed at baseline between the two groups. The mean value of BOP decreased in the ERL group from 40% at baseline to 17% after 6 months (P <0.0001) and in the UI group from 46% at baseline to 15% after 6 months (P <0.0001). The sites treated with ERL demonstrated mean CAL gain of 1.48 +/- 0.73 mm (P <0.001) and of 1.11 +/- 0.59 mm (P <0.001) at 3 and 6 months, respectively. The sites treated with UI demonstrated mean CAL gain of 1.53 +/- 0.67 mm (P <0.001) and of 1.11 +/- 0.46 mm (P <0.001) at 3 and 6 months, respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed between the groups (P >0.05). Conclusion: Within the limits of the present study, it can be concluded that both therapies led to significant improvements of the investigated clinical parameters.
引用
收藏
页码:966 / 973
页数:8
相关论文
共 23 条