Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39542954›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of implant dentistry2024

The clinical efficacy of laser in the nonsurgical treatment of peri-implantitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Nengwen Huang, Yang Li, Wen Li, Rui Zhao, Yanjing Ou, Jiang Chen, Jinjin Li

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of implant dentistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Nengwen HuangDepartment of Stomatology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, No.1 Jianshe Dong Road, ErQi District, Zhengzhou, Henan, China.
Yang LiDepartment of Stomatology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, No.1 Jianshe Dong Road, ErQi District, Zhengzhou, Henan, China.
Wen LiDepartment of Stomatology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, No.1 Jianshe Dong Road, ErQi District, Zhengzhou, Henan, China.
Rui ZhaoDepartment of Stomatology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, No.1 Jianshe Dong Road, ErQi District, Zhengzhou, Henan, China.
Yanjing OuFujian Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, School and Hospital of Stomatology, Fujian Medical University, 46 Yangqiao Zhong Lu, Gulou District, Fuzhou, Fujian, China.
Jiang ChenFujian Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, School and Hospital of Stomatology, Fujian Medical University, 46 Yangqiao Zhong Lu, Gulou District, Fuzhou, Fujian, China.
Jinjin LiDepartment of Stomatology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, No.1 Jianshe Dong Road, ErQi District, Zhengzhou, Henan, China. drlijinjin@163.com.

Funding

Joint Project of Medical Science and Technology of Henan Province Grant number: LHGJ20230308
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo systematically assess studies regarding the efficacy of lasers in the nonsurgical treatment of peri-implantitis.

methodsElectronic and manual searches were performed by two reviewers independently. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing lasers vs. mechanical debridement or air abrasive on primary outcome (probing depth (PD)) and secondary outcomes (bone loss, bleeding on probing (BOP), clinical attachment level (CAL) and plaque index (PI)) were included. Data extraction and quality assessment were conducted independently. Weighted mean difference (WMD) or standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated for continuous outcomes. Publication bias, leave-one-out analysis and GRADE assessment were conducted.

result13 eligible publications were included in the review and 12 in the meta-analysis. Solid-state lasers significantly improved in PD (WMD = -0.39, 95% CI (-0.70, -0.09), p = 0.01, moderate-certainty evidence), BOP (SMD =-0.76, 95% CI (-1.23, -0.28), p = 0.002, moderate-certainty evidence) and CAL (WMD =-0.19, 95% CI (-0.39, -0.00), p = 0.05, moderate-certainty evidence), but not in bone loss (WMD = 0.03, 95% CI (-0.13, 0.18), p = 0.74, low-certainty evidence) and PI (SMD =-0.19, 95% CI (-0.42, 0.04), p = 0.11, moderate-certainty evidence) compared with the control group. However, the diode lasers showed no clinical advantages. No publication bias was detected, and leave-one-out analysis confirmed the robustness of findings.

conclusionIn the nonsurgical treatment of peri-implantitis, solid-state lasers yielded positive influence in term of PD, BOP and CAL, while diode laser provided no beneficial effect. Future well-designed large RCTs are still needed, considering the limitations of included studies. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This review aimed to guide clinicians in choosing the appropriate laser for peri-implantitis, enhancing treatment strategies and attaining better outcomes.

Indexed as

Peri-ImplantitisHumansLasers, Solid-StateLaser TherapyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeLaserNonsurgical treatmentPeri-implantitisSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID39542954
PMCPMC11564455

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.