ReviewCureus2025
Comparative Analysis of Er:YAG and Er,Cr:YSGG Lasers on Root Debridement and Cell Attachment Versus Conventional Instrumentation Methods: A Scoping Review.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Effective subgingival debridement is essential for periodontal therapy. Subgingival debridement techniques induce morphological changes that influence healing. While hand instruments and ultrasonic scalers are the gold standard, erbium lasers offer potential advantages in biocompatibility and healing. This scoping review compares the effectiveness of erbium lasers (Er,Cr:YSGG (erbium, chromium-doped yttrium-scandium-gallium-garnet) and Er:YAG (erbium-doped yttrium-aluminum-garnet)) and conventional debridement methods in calculus removal, root surface topography, and cellular attachment following root debridement, based on in vitro studies. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed and Google Scholar for English-language articles published between 2014 and 2024. Studies evaluating erbium lasers compared to conventional debridement methods were included. A total of 1224 studies were initially identified from two databases: PubMed and Google Scholar. Following the eligibility assessment, 15 in vitro studies were analyzed. All methods effectively achieved subgingival instrumentation; additionally, erbium lasers produced smear layer-free surfaces with increased porosity, which may facilitate fibroblast attachment. However, laser-treated surfaces exhibited greater roughness and crater formation compared to conventional methods, with higher energy levels contributing to thermal damage. While some studies reported residual calculus on laser-treated surfaces, others demonstrated enhanced calculus removal and minimal root substance loss. Cell attachment studies indicated that Er:YAG lasers promoted fibroblast viability and proliferation, whereas high-energy Er,Cr:YSGG applications had variable effects on biocompatibility. Erbium lasers present a promising alternative to conventional debridement methods, improving smear layer removal and cell adhesion. However, variations in laser parameters impact treatment outcomes, emphasizing the need for standardized protocols. Further in vivo and clinical studies are required to validate their long-term effectiveness in periodontal therapy.
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.