Clinical Study of Biostimulation with Low-Power Diode Laser After Dental Extractions.

IF 1.7 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Yolanda Collado Murcia, Pia Lopez-Jornet, Francisco Parra Perez
{"title":"Clinical Study of Biostimulation with Low-Power Diode Laser After Dental Extractions.","authors":"Yolanda Collado Murcia, Pia Lopez-Jornet, Francisco Parra Perez","doi":"10.3390/clinpract15050090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Introduction:</b> The objective of the present work is to assess the efficacy of photobiomodulation (PBM) with respect to pain, inflammation, and healing after tooth extractions as compared with a sham treatment. <b>Method:</b> A single-blinded, randomized clinical study conducted in a private dental clinic in Murcia, it included 124 patients who needed a tooth extraction, excluding those with medical conditions that could affect healing (such as non-controlled diabetes, immunosuppression, or hemorrhagic disorders). Group I (Experimental): extraction and PBM session with a diode laser (power: 0.5 W, energy 15 J/cm<sup>2</sup> for 10-30 s at 1 mm from the tissue). Group II (Sham treatment): tooth extraction and application of inactive PBM. <b>Results:</b> Pain and inflammation decreased similarly in both groups over time. Anxiety decreased in both groups without significant differences (<i>p</i> = 0.776; <i>p</i> = 0.246). There was no evidence that the treatment or location of the extraction had an influence on healing. Suturing the socket increased the likelihood of good healing (<i>p</i> = 0.048), while long procedures reduced it (<i>p</i> = 0.040). <b>Conclusions:</b> PBM is a non-invasive and safe therapy. This study did not show significant differences with respect to the sham treatment. More research is needed with a standardized methodology to better assess its efficacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":45306,"journal":{"name":"Clinics and Practice","volume":"15 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12110639/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinics and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/clinpract15050090","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The objective of the present work is to assess the efficacy of photobiomodulation (PBM) with respect to pain, inflammation, and healing after tooth extractions as compared with a sham treatment. Method: A single-blinded, randomized clinical study conducted in a private dental clinic in Murcia, it included 124 patients who needed a tooth extraction, excluding those with medical conditions that could affect healing (such as non-controlled diabetes, immunosuppression, or hemorrhagic disorders). Group I (Experimental): extraction and PBM session with a diode laser (power: 0.5 W, energy 15 J/cm2 for 10-30 s at 1 mm from the tissue). Group II (Sham treatment): tooth extraction and application of inactive PBM. Results: Pain and inflammation decreased similarly in both groups over time. Anxiety decreased in both groups without significant differences (p = 0.776; p = 0.246). There was no evidence that the treatment or location of the extraction had an influence on healing. Suturing the socket increased the likelihood of good healing (p = 0.048), while long procedures reduced it (p = 0.040). Conclusions: PBM is a non-invasive and safe therapy. This study did not show significant differences with respect to the sham treatment. More research is needed with a standardized methodology to better assess its efficacy.

低功率二极管激光对拔牙后生物刺激的临床研究。
简介:本研究的目的是评估光生物调节(PBM)在拔牙后疼痛、炎症和愈合方面的效果,并与假治疗进行比较。方法:在穆尔西亚的一家私人牙科诊所进行了一项单盲、随机临床研究,包括124名需要拔牙的患者,不包括那些可能影响愈合的疾病(如非控制糖尿病、免疫抑制或出血性疾病)。第一组(实验):用二极管激光器(功率:0.5 W,能量15 J/cm2,距离组织1mm处10-30 s)进行提取和PBM。第二组(假手术):拔牙并应用无活性PBM。结果:随着时间的推移,两组疼痛和炎症的减轻相似。两组患者焦虑程度均有所下降,差异无统计学意义(p = 0.776;P = 0.246)。没有证据表明拔牙的治疗方法或位置对愈合有影响。缝合窝增加了良好愈合的可能性(p = 0.048),而长时间的手术则降低了愈合的可能性(p = 0.040)。结论:PBM是一种无创、安全的治疗方法。这项研究没有显示出与假治疗有显著差异。需要更多的研究和标准化的方法来更好地评估其功效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinics and Practice
Clinics and Practice MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
4.30%
发文量
91
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信