Photodiagnosis and photodynamic therapy · 2017
Is antimicrobial photodynamic therapy an effective treatment for chronic periodontitis in diabetes mellitus and cigarette smokers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический 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.
Al-Hamoudi Nawwaf
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: To determine whether treatment with antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) as an adjunct to scaling and root planing (SRP) improves clinical, microbiological and immunological outcomes in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and cigarette smokers with chronic periodontitis (CP).
METHODS: Databases (MEDLINE, PubMed; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register) were searched up to and including May 2017. The addressed PICO question was: "Does aPDT as an adjunct to SRP improves clinical, microbiological and immunological outcomes in T2DM and smokers with CP?"
RESULTS: Six randomized clinical trials were included. All studies reporting clinical periodontal, microbiological, and immunological parameters showed that aPDT was effective in the treatment of CP in T2DM and smokers at follow up. When compared with SRP alone, none of the studies showed additional benefits of aPDT at follow up. Considering the effects of adjunctive aPDT as compared to SRP on clinical signs of CP in T2DM and smokers, no difference could be observed for all evaluated parameters (PD: Z=-0.81, P=0.41; CAL: Z=-0.19, P=0.84) except IL-1β (Z=4.57, P<0.001).
CONCLUSION: Due to limited evidence, it remains debatable whether aPDT as an adjunct to SRP is effective in improving clinical, microbiological and immunological outcomes compared to SRP alone in T2DM and smokers with CP. Further well-designed, large-scale clinical trials with microbiological parameters and long follow up periods are needed in order to assess the efficacy of adjunctive aPDT in T2DM and cigarette smokers with CP.
METHODS: Databases (MEDLINE, PubMed; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register) were searched up to and including May 2017. The addressed PICO question was: "Does aPDT as an adjunct to SRP improves clinical, microbiological and immunological outcomes in T2DM and smokers with CP?"
RESULTS: Six randomized clinical trials were included. All studies reporting clinical periodontal, microbiological, and immunological parameters showed that aPDT was effective in the treatment of CP in T2DM and smokers at follow up. When compared with SRP alone, none of the studies showed additional benefits of aPDT at follow up. Considering the effects of adjunctive aPDT as compared to SRP on clinical signs of CP in T2DM and smokers, no difference could be observed for all evaluated parameters (PD: Z=-0.81, P=0.41; CAL: Z=-0.19, P=0.84) except IL-1β (Z=4.57, P<0.001).
CONCLUSION: Due to limited evidence, it remains debatable whether aPDT as an adjunct to SRP is effective in improving clinical, microbiological and immunological outcomes compared to SRP alone in T2DM and smokers with CP. Further well-designed, large-scale clinical trials with microbiological parameters and long follow up periods are needed in order to assess the efficacy of adjunctive aPDT in T2DM and cigarette smokers with CP.