不同光敏剂光动力疗法治疗种植体周围炎的疗效:随机临床试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q3 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL
Xin Li, Hang Liu, Lian Yang, Yiming Ji, Dingli Feng, Ruiqi Shao, Guanhua Zhang, Shichen Lin, Shaoyu Duan, Xue Wu
{"title":"不同光敏剂光动力疗法治疗种植体周围炎的疗效:随机临床试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Xin Li, Hang Liu, Lian Yang, Yiming Ji, Dingli Feng, Ruiqi Shao, Guanhua Zhang, Shichen Lin, Shaoyu Duan, Xue Wu","doi":"10.1007/s10103-025-04612-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To systematically evaluate the efficacy of photodynamic therapy in treating peri-implantitis and compare the effectiveness of various photosensitizers based on randomized clinical trials. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, incorporating data from PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and CNKI up to December 31, 2024. Randomized clinical trials that assessed the efficacy of photodynamic therapy with various photosensitizers for peri-implantitis were included. Primary outcomes included bleeding on probing, probing depth, plaque index, clinical attachment level, crestal bone loss, and bleeding index. Standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for each outcome to quantify the effect size. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. 13 randomized clinical trials involving 678 participants were included in the analysis. Photodynamic therapy significantly improved several clinical outcomes compared to controls: bleeding on probing (SMD = -0.49, 95% CI: -0.89 to -0.09), probing depth (SMD = -1.49, 95% CI: -2.31 to -0.66), plaque index (SMD = -1.11, 95% CI: -1.98 to -0.25), and crestal bone loss (SMD = -0.53, 95% CI: -0.89 to -0.17). Subgroup analyses revealed that Toluidine Blue was the most effective photosensitizer, showing superior improvements across multiple outcomes. Photodynamic therapy is an effective treatment for peri-implantitis, particularly when using Toluidine Blue, which consistently outperformed other photosensitizers in improving clinical outcomes. These findings provide strong evidence for integrating photodynamic therapy into peri-implantitis management protocols, offering a promising, minimally invasive alternative to conventional treatments. Future studies should focus on optimizing photodynamic therapy protocols, assessing long-term outcomes, and evaluating its effectiveness in diverse patient populations.Clinical trial number: PROSPERO (CRD42024600326).</p>","PeriodicalId":17978,"journal":{"name":"Lasers in Medical Science","volume":"40 1","pages":"359"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12441095/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of photodynamic therapy with various photosensitizers for peri-implantitis treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.\",\"authors\":\"Xin Li, Hang Liu, Lian Yang, Yiming Ji, Dingli Feng, Ruiqi Shao, Guanhua Zhang, Shichen Lin, Shaoyu Duan, Xue Wu\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10103-025-04612-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>To systematically evaluate the efficacy of photodynamic therapy in treating peri-implantitis and compare the effectiveness of various photosensitizers based on randomized clinical trials. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, incorporating data from PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and CNKI up to December 31, 2024. Randomized clinical trials that assessed the efficacy of photodynamic therapy with various photosensitizers for peri-implantitis were included. Primary outcomes included bleeding on probing, probing depth, plaque index, clinical attachment level, crestal bone loss, and bleeding index. Standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for each outcome to quantify the effect size. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. 13 randomized clinical trials involving 678 participants were included in the analysis. Photodynamic therapy significantly improved several clinical outcomes compared to controls: bleeding on probing (SMD = -0.49, 95% CI: -0.89 to -0.09), probing depth (SMD = -1.49, 95% CI: -2.31 to -0.66), plaque index (SMD = -1.11, 95% CI: -1.98 to -0.25), and crestal bone loss (SMD = -0.53, 95% CI: -0.89 to -0.17). Subgroup analyses revealed that Toluidine Blue was the most effective photosensitizer, showing superior improvements across multiple outcomes. Photodynamic therapy is an effective treatment for peri-implantitis, particularly when using Toluidine Blue, which consistently outperformed other photosensitizers in improving clinical outcomes. These findings provide strong evidence for integrating photodynamic therapy into peri-implantitis management protocols, offering a promising, minimally invasive alternative to conventional treatments. Future studies should focus on optimizing photodynamic therapy protocols, assessing long-term outcomes, and evaluating its effectiveness in diverse patient populations.Clinical trial number: PROSPERO (CRD42024600326).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17978,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Lasers in Medical Science\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"359\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12441095/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Lasers in Medical Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-025-04612-7\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lasers in Medical Science","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-025-04612-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

通过随机临床试验,系统评价光动力疗法治疗种植体周围炎的疗效,比较各种光敏剂的疗效。采用截至2024年12月31日的PubMed/MEDLINE、Embase、Web of Science和CNKI数据,按照系统评价和荟萃分析首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南进行系统评价和meta分析。随机临床试验评估了不同光敏剂对种植体周围炎的光动力治疗效果。主要结局包括探牙时出血、探牙深度、牙菌斑指数、临床附着水平、牙冠骨质流失和出血指数。计算每个结果的标准化平均差异(SMD)和95%置信区间(ci),以量化效应大小。使用Cochrane风险-偏倚工具评估偏倚风险。13项随机临床试验涉及678名参与者纳入分析。与对照组相比,光动力疗法显著改善了几个临床结果:探探出血(SMD = -0.49, 95% CI: -0.89至-0.09)、探探深度(SMD = -1.49, 95% CI: -2.31至-0.66)、斑块指数(SMD = -1.11, 95% CI: -1.98至-0.25)和牙冠骨质流失(SMD = -0.53, 95% CI: -0.89至-0.17)。亚组分析显示甲苯胺蓝是最有效的光敏剂,在多个结果中显示出优越的改善。光动力疗法是一种有效的治疗种植体周围炎的方法,特别是当使用甲苯胺蓝时,它在改善临床结果方面一直优于其他光敏剂。这些发现为将光动力疗法整合到种植体周围炎治疗方案中提供了强有力的证据,为传统治疗提供了一种有前途的微创替代方案。未来的研究应侧重于优化光动力治疗方案,评估长期结果,并评估其在不同患者群体中的有效性。临床试验号:PROSPERO (CRD42024600326)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Efficacy of photodynamic therapy with various photosensitizers for peri-implantitis treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Efficacy of photodynamic therapy with various photosensitizers for peri-implantitis treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Efficacy of photodynamic therapy with various photosensitizers for peri-implantitis treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Efficacy of photodynamic therapy with various photosensitizers for peri-implantitis treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

To systematically evaluate the efficacy of photodynamic therapy in treating peri-implantitis and compare the effectiveness of various photosensitizers based on randomized clinical trials. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, incorporating data from PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and CNKI up to December 31, 2024. Randomized clinical trials that assessed the efficacy of photodynamic therapy with various photosensitizers for peri-implantitis were included. Primary outcomes included bleeding on probing, probing depth, plaque index, clinical attachment level, crestal bone loss, and bleeding index. Standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for each outcome to quantify the effect size. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. 13 randomized clinical trials involving 678 participants were included in the analysis. Photodynamic therapy significantly improved several clinical outcomes compared to controls: bleeding on probing (SMD = -0.49, 95% CI: -0.89 to -0.09), probing depth (SMD = -1.49, 95% CI: -2.31 to -0.66), plaque index (SMD = -1.11, 95% CI: -1.98 to -0.25), and crestal bone loss (SMD = -0.53, 95% CI: -0.89 to -0.17). Subgroup analyses revealed that Toluidine Blue was the most effective photosensitizer, showing superior improvements across multiple outcomes. Photodynamic therapy is an effective treatment for peri-implantitis, particularly when using Toluidine Blue, which consistently outperformed other photosensitizers in improving clinical outcomes. These findings provide strong evidence for integrating photodynamic therapy into peri-implantitis management protocols, offering a promising, minimally invasive alternative to conventional treatments. Future studies should focus on optimizing photodynamic therapy protocols, assessing long-term outcomes, and evaluating its effectiveness in diverse patient populations.Clinical trial number: PROSPERO (CRD42024600326).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Lasers in Medical Science
Lasers in Medical Science 医学-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
4.80%
发文量
192
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Lasers in Medical Science (LIMS) has established itself as the leading international journal in the rapidly expanding field of medical and dental applications of lasers and light. It provides a forum for the publication of papers on the technical, experimental, and clinical aspects of the use of medical lasers, including lasers in surgery, endoscopy, angioplasty, hyperthermia of tumors, and photodynamic therapy. In addition to medical laser applications, LIMS presents high-quality manuscripts on a wide range of dental topics, including aesthetic dentistry, endodontics, orthodontics, and prosthodontics. The journal publishes articles on the medical and dental applications of novel laser technologies, light delivery systems, sensors to monitor laser effects, basic laser-tissue interactions, and the modeling of laser-tissue interactions. Beyond laser applications, LIMS features articles relating to the use of non-laser light-tissue interactions.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信