H-Index
75
Scimago Lab
powered by Scopus
JCR
Clarivate
Analytics
18%
Acceptance
Rate
call: +1.631.470.9640
Mon-Fri 10 am - 2 pm EST

Logo



eISSN: 1643-3750

Get your full text copy in PDF

Clinical Effectiveness of Er: YAG Lasers Adjunct to Scaling and Root Planing in Non-Surgical Treatment of Chronic Periodontitis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Lei Ma, Xiaolin Zhang, Zhe Ma, Hong Shi, Yanning Zhang, Mingxuan Wu, Wei Cui

(College and Hospital of Stomatology, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China (mainland))

Med Sci Monit 2018; 24:7090-7099

DOI: 10.12659/MSM.911863


BACKGROUND: Er: YAG lasers (ERLs) show suitable characteristics for scaling and root planing, but previous studies have drawn conflicting conclusions. This meta-analysis aimed to systematically appraise the available evidence concerning the effectiveness of ERLs as an adjunct to scaling and root planing (SRP) for non-surgical periodontal treatment.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ERLs+SRP with SRP alone for the treatment of chronic periodontitis were searched in 9 electronic biomedical databases up to January 2018. The weighted mean differences (WMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were counted for probing depth (PD) reduction, clinical attachment level (CAL) gain, and visual analog scale (VAS) score. Heterogeneity was evaluated with the I² statistic for interstudy comparisons and the χ²-based Q statistic for intra-study comparisons. Sensitivity analysis was conducted by switching to a random or fixed effect model based on the heterogeneity. Publication bias was measured by Begg’s test.
RESULTS: Ten related RCTs met the inclusion criteria. There were statistically significant differences in the assessed clinical parameters at the three-month follow-up: PD reduction (WMD=0.32, 95%CI range from 0.14 to 0.51, p<0.001; p=0.003, I²=69.7%); CAL gain (WMD=0.31, 95%CI range from 0.22 to 0.40, p<0.001; p=0.209, I²=28.8%); and VAS scores (WMD=–1.38, 95%CI range from –2.45 to –0.31, p<0.001; p=0.182, I²=44%). There were no significant differences at the six- and twelve-month follow-ups. Sensitivity analysis revealed that the results were consistent. No evidence of publication bias was detected.
CONCLUSIONS: This systematic analysis demonstrated that ERLs+SRP provides additional short-term effectiveness and that patients experience less pain compared to SRP. There were no significant differences at the medium-term and long-term follow-ups. Long-term well-designed RCTs are required.

This paper has been published under Creative Common Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) allowing to download articles and share them with others as long as they credit the authors and the publisher, but without permission to change them in any way or use them commercially.
I agree