ArticleLasers in medical science2017
Preclinical study of a cost-effective photodynamic therapy protocol for treating oral candidoses.
Article in Lasers in medical science, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Photosensitizers Mediated Photodynamic Inactivation against Fungi.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a promising treatment for oral candidoses. Its use as an alternative to antifungals prevents several adverse effects, including microbial resistance. However, most PDT protocols do not employ devices and consumables commonly available in dental practice, thus influencing treatment affordability. This study aimed to determine the efficacy of a PDT method based on light curing units' blue LEDs combined to a plaque-disclosing composition (5% erythrosine) against C. albicans in culture and in a murine model of oral candidosis. Standard and resistant fungal strains were tested in vitro in planktonic and biofilm forms. PDT (pre-irradiation time periods: 30 and 60 s; irradiation time: 3 min) was compared to control conditions without light and/or erythrosine. Mice with induced oral candidosis (n = 40) randomly received PDT or similar control conditions with subsequent C. albicans count. These mice underwent histological analysis, as well as 12 healthy mice submitted to experimental treatments. PDT completely inactivated C. albicans planktonic cells and biofilm. Control conditions presented minor differences (ANOVA, p < 0.05), with mean values ranging from 5.2 to 6.8 log10 (UFC/mL). Infected mice presented no significant difference in C. albicans counts consequent to treatments (ANOVA, p = 0.721), although the PDT protocol was able to enhance the inflammatory infiltrate in healthy mice. It can be concluded that the tested PDT protocol can inactivate C. albicans but still needs further investigation in order to achieve efficacy and safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.