European journal of orthodontics · 2018
The effect of low-level laser therapy on orthodontically induced root resorption: a pilot double blind randomized controlled trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Ng Doreen, Chan Ambrose K, Papadopoulou Alexandra K, Dalci Oyku, Petocz Peter, Darendeliler Mehmet Ali
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The effect of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) on accelerating orthodontic tooth movement has been extensively studied; however, there is limited knowledge on the use of LLLT on orthodontic root resorption.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of LLLT on orthodontically induced inflammatory root resorption (OIIRR) and to compare the difference between pulsed and continuous LLLT on OIIRR.
TRIAL DESIGN: Double-blind, single-centre 3-arm parallel split-mouth randomized controlled trial.
PARTICIPANTS: Twenty adolescent patients who required bilateral maxillary first premolar (MFP) orthodontic extractions were recruited from the Sydney Dental Hospital between October 2014 and December 2014.
INTERVENTION: All MFPs were tipped buccally for 28 days to induce OIIRR. The experimental premolars (n = 20) received LLLT and the control premolars (n = 20) received placebo-laser on days 0, 1, 2, 3, 7, 14, and 21. Ten experimental premolars received LLLT via continuous delivery and 10 received pulsed delivery.
LASER PARAMETER: AlGaAs diode laser of 808 nm wavelength, 0.18 W power, 1.6 J per point, and duration of 9s for continuous mode and 4.5 s for pulsed mode.
OUTCOME: The difference in root resorption crater volume between LLLT and placebo-laser and continuous or pulsed laser delivery after 28 days.
RANDOMIZATION: Randomization was computer-generated, with allocation concealment by opaque sequentially numbered sealed envelopes.
BLINDING: The participants and operator were blinded.
RESULTS: Eighty-eight patients were screened and 20 patients were randomized. Forty premolars were analysed. LLLT resulted in 23 per cent less root resorption compared to the placebo (P = 0.026). Pulsed laser delivery resulted in 5 per cent less root resorption than continuous; however, this was not statistically significant (P = 0.823). No harm was observed.
CONCLUSION: Teeth treated with LLLT had less total root resorption than placebo-laser. Furthermore, there was minimal difference between pulsed or continuous delivery of LLLT.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12616000829415).
PROTOCOL: The protocol was not published before trial commencement.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of LLLT on orthodontically induced inflammatory root resorption (OIIRR) and to compare the difference between pulsed and continuous LLLT on OIIRR.
TRIAL DESIGN: Double-blind, single-centre 3-arm parallel split-mouth randomized controlled trial.
PARTICIPANTS: Twenty adolescent patients who required bilateral maxillary first premolar (MFP) orthodontic extractions were recruited from the Sydney Dental Hospital between October 2014 and December 2014.
INTERVENTION: All MFPs were tipped buccally for 28 days to induce OIIRR. The experimental premolars (n = 20) received LLLT and the control premolars (n = 20) received placebo-laser on days 0, 1, 2, 3, 7, 14, and 21. Ten experimental premolars received LLLT via continuous delivery and 10 received pulsed delivery.
LASER PARAMETER: AlGaAs diode laser of 808 nm wavelength, 0.18 W power, 1.6 J per point, and duration of 9s for continuous mode and 4.5 s for pulsed mode.
OUTCOME: The difference in root resorption crater volume between LLLT and placebo-laser and continuous or pulsed laser delivery after 28 days.
RANDOMIZATION: Randomization was computer-generated, with allocation concealment by opaque sequentially numbered sealed envelopes.
BLINDING: The participants and operator were blinded.
RESULTS: Eighty-eight patients were screened and 20 patients were randomized. Forty premolars were analysed. LLLT resulted in 23 per cent less root resorption compared to the placebo (P = 0.026). Pulsed laser delivery resulted in 5 per cent less root resorption than continuous; however, this was not statistically significant (P = 0.823). No harm was observed.
CONCLUSION: Teeth treated with LLLT had less total root resorption than placebo-laser. Furthermore, there was minimal difference between pulsed or continuous delivery of LLLT.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12616000829415).
PROTOCOL: The protocol was not published before trial commencement.