Photodiagnosis and photodynamic therapy · 2021
Is antimicrobial photodynamic therapy an effective treatment modality for aggressive periodontitis? A systematic review of in vivo human randomized controlled clinical trials.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Dalvi Snehal, Benedicenti Stefano, Hanna Reem
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Limitations of scaling and root planing (SRP) have directed research to utilize additional therapies to enhance conventional techniques. The present systematic review was conducted to evaluate and present a comprehensive overview on effectiveness of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) in the management of aggressive periodontitis (AgP).
METHODOLOGY: The PRISMA statement guidelines and Cochrane Collaboration recommendations were followed to conduct this systematic review. The review protocol is registered in PROSPERO (CRD 42019143316). A structured electronic and manual search strategy was implied to gather the relevant published data on in vivo human RCTs from their earliest records until 31st October 2019. Relevant data was extracted from the eligible studies, analysed and impartially appraised for its quality.
RESULTS: Eleven papers met the eligibility criteria and included in this review. The data on standardized study protocol, ideal photosensitizer (PS) dye-wavelength combination, optimal parameters was inconclusive and a high risk of bias in majority of the studies noted, which are fundamental in establishing a standardized and replicable protocol.
CONCLUSION: Ultimately researchers should conduct well-designed and robust RCTs performed by trained clinicians in order to determine the effectiveness of aPDT, if any, after acknowledging the drawbacks highlighted in this systematic review.
METHODOLOGY: The PRISMA statement guidelines and Cochrane Collaboration recommendations were followed to conduct this systematic review. The review protocol is registered in PROSPERO (CRD 42019143316). A structured electronic and manual search strategy was implied to gather the relevant published data on in vivo human RCTs from their earliest records until 31st October 2019. Relevant data was extracted from the eligible studies, analysed and impartially appraised for its quality.
RESULTS: Eleven papers met the eligibility criteria and included in this review. The data on standardized study protocol, ideal photosensitizer (PS) dye-wavelength combination, optimal parameters was inconclusive and a high risk of bias in majority of the studies noted, which are fundamental in establishing a standardized and replicable protocol.
CONCLUSION: Ultimately researchers should conduct well-designed and robust RCTs performed by trained clinicians in order to determine the effectiveness of aPDT, if any, after acknowledging the drawbacks highlighted in this systematic review.