Cureus · 2026
Effect of Low-Level Laser Therapy on Implant Osseointegration and Peri-Implant Clinical Outcomes: A Prospective Observational Study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Negi Pritha, Jain Aishla, J Sushma, Akella Lakshmi Sailaja, Sachdev Sanpreet S, Parveen Abida
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) has been proposed as an adjunctive modality to enhance osseointegration and improve peri-implant healing after dental implant placement. However, evidence regarding its clinical effectiveness remains inconclusive. This study evaluated the effects of adjunctive LLLT on implant stability, marginal bone remodeling, peri-implant probing depth, and postoperative complications over a 12-month follow-up period.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective observational clinical study was conducted on 80 dental implants placed in patients requiring single-tooth implant rehabilitation. Following standardized implant placement, all participants received LLLT using an Epic X diode laser (BIOLASE, Inc., Foothill Ranch, CA, USA) immediately after surgery and on postoperative days 3, 7, and 14. Implant stability was assessed using resonance frequency analysis, whereas radiographic marginal bone levels and peri-implant probing depth were evaluated at prosthetic loading, at six months, and at 12 months. Data were analyzed using repeated-measures analysis of variance with Bonferroni-adjusted post hoc testing.
RESULTS: Implant stability improved significantly during follow-up, with the mean implant stability quotient increasing from 67.98 ± 4.02 at implant placement to 74.28 ± 4.54 at 12 months (p < 0.001). Marginal bone loss increased gradually from 0.19 ± 0.08 mm at prosthetic loading to 0.55 ± 0.16 mm at 12 months but remained within clinically acceptable limits (p < 0.001). Mean peri-implant probing depth increased modestly from 2.13 ± 0.47 mm to 2.52 ± 0.61 mm during follow-up (p < 0.001). No complications were observed in 71 (88.8%), 69 (86.2%), and 64 (80.0%) implants at prosthetic loading, six months, and 12 months, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Adjunctive LLLT was accompanied by progressive improvement in implant stability, favorable peri-implant tissue healing, acceptable marginal bone remodeling, and a low incidence of postoperative complications during the 12-month follow-up period. However, in the absence of a control group, these outcomes cannot be attributed specifically to LLLT. Larger randomized controlled trials with longer follow-up periods are required to determine whether LLLT provides additional clinical benefits beyond conventional implant healing.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective observational clinical study was conducted on 80 dental implants placed in patients requiring single-tooth implant rehabilitation. Following standardized implant placement, all participants received LLLT using an Epic X diode laser (BIOLASE, Inc., Foothill Ranch, CA, USA) immediately after surgery and on postoperative days 3, 7, and 14. Implant stability was assessed using resonance frequency analysis, whereas radiographic marginal bone levels and peri-implant probing depth were evaluated at prosthetic loading, at six months, and at 12 months. Data were analyzed using repeated-measures analysis of variance with Bonferroni-adjusted post hoc testing.
RESULTS: Implant stability improved significantly during follow-up, with the mean implant stability quotient increasing from 67.98 ± 4.02 at implant placement to 74.28 ± 4.54 at 12 months (p < 0.001). Marginal bone loss increased gradually from 0.19 ± 0.08 mm at prosthetic loading to 0.55 ± 0.16 mm at 12 months but remained within clinically acceptable limits (p < 0.001). Mean peri-implant probing depth increased modestly from 2.13 ± 0.47 mm to 2.52 ± 0.61 mm during follow-up (p < 0.001). No complications were observed in 71 (88.8%), 69 (86.2%), and 64 (80.0%) implants at prosthetic loading, six months, and 12 months, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Adjunctive LLLT was accompanied by progressive improvement in implant stability, favorable peri-implant tissue healing, acceptable marginal bone remodeling, and a low incidence of postoperative complications during the 12-month follow-up period. However, in the absence of a control group, these outcomes cannot be attributed specifically to LLLT. Larger randomized controlled trials with longer follow-up periods are required to determine whether LLLT provides additional clinical benefits beyond conventional implant healing.