Loading…
The effect of low-level laser therapy on orthodontically induced root resorption: a pilot double blind randomized controlled trial
Summary 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 infla...
Saved in:
Published in: | European journal of orthodontics 2018-05, Vol.40 (3), p.317-325 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Summary
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. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0141-5387 1460-2210 |
DOI: | 10.1093/ejo/cjx065 |