ReviewPharmaceutics2024
Influence of Photosensitizer on Photodynamic Therapy for Peri-Implantitis: A Systematic Review.
Review in Pharmaceutics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of rose bengal-mediated antimicrobial photodynamic therapy adjunctive to mechanical debridement on clinical, microbiological, and immunological parameters in peri-implantitis: a parallel, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial.Lasers in medical science · 2025Trial
- Indocyanine Green as a Photosensitizer in Periodontitis Treatment: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- A versatile nanoplatform with excellent biofilm permeability and spatiotemporal ROS regulation for peri-implantitis treatment.Theranostics · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The treatment of peri-implantitis is challenging in the clinical practice of implant dentistry. With limited therapeutic options and drug resistance, there is a need for alternative methods, such as photodynamic therapy (PDT), which is a minimally invasive procedure used to treat peri-implantitis. This study evaluated whether the type of photosensitizer used influences the results of inflammatory control, reduction in peri-implant pocket depth, bleeding during probing, and reduction in bone loss in the dental implant region. We registered the study in the PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Review) database. We searched three main databases and gray literature in English without date restrictions. In vivo randomized clinical studies involving individuals with peri-implantitis, smokers, patients with diabetes, and healthy controls were included. PDT was used as the primary intervention. Comparators considered mechanical debridement with a reduction in pocket depth as the primary outcome and clinical attachment level, bleeding on probing, gingival index, plaque index, and microbiological analysis as secondary outcomes. After reviewing the eligibility criteria, we included seven articles out of 266. A great variety of photosensitizers were observed, and it was concluded that the selection of the most appropriate type of photosensitizer must consider the patient's characteristics and peri-implantitis conditions. The effectiveness of PDT, its effects on the oral microbiome, and the clinical patterns of peri-implantitis may vary depending on the photosensitizer chosen, which is a crucial factor in personalizing peri-implantitis treatment.
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.