ArticleCureus2026
Comparative Evaluation of Photodynamic Therapy and Photoablation as Adjuncts to Open Flap Debridement Versus Open Flap Debridement Alone in Periodontitis Patients: A Double-Blinded Randomised Controlled Trial.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResidual periodontal pockets may persist after Phase I therapy, contributing to recurrent inflammation and progressive periodontal breakdown. Photodynamic therapy (PDT) and photoablation have been proposed as adjuncts to open flap debridement, although direct comparative evidence remains limited.
objectiveThis study aims to compare the clinical effectiveness of PDT and photoablation as adjuncts to open flap debridement with that of open flap debridement alone in patients with chronic periodontitis.
methodsThis participant- and outcome-assessor-blinded, parallel-arm randomised controlled trial enrolled 51 patients with residual probing pocket depths of 5-7 mm after Phase I therapy. Seventeen participants were allocated to each of three groups: open flap debridement alone, open flap debridement with PDT using methylene blue and a 650 nm diode laser, or open flap debridement with photoablation using a 980 nm diode laser. Forty-five participants completed the six-month follow-up. Plaque Index, Gingival Index, Probing Pocket Depth, Clinical Attachment Level, Gingival Recession, and Papillary Bleeding Index were assessed at baseline, three months, and six months.
resultsAll groups improved significantly over time. At six months, Clinical Attachment Level, Gingival Recession, and Papillary Bleeding Index differed significantly among the groups (all p < 0.001). Mean Clinical Attachment Level values were 3.93 ± 1.10 mm, 2.47 ± 0.74 mm, and 2.80 ± 0.56 mm in the control, PDT, and photoablation groups, respectively. Corresponding Gingival Recession values were 1.60 ± 1.06 mm, 0.27 ± 0.46 mm, and 0.53 ± 0.52 mm, while Papillary Bleeding Index values were 0.59 ± 0.12, 0.41 ± 0.07, and 0.45 ± 0.07. Plaque Index, Gingival Index, and Probing Pocket Depth remained comparable among the groups. No significant differences were observed between the two laser-assisted groups.
conclusionPDT and photoablation provided comparable additional benefits when combined with open flap debridement, particularly for clinical attachment, gingival recession, and bleeding control. Larger multicentre trials with longer follow-up are required to confirm the durability and clinical applicability of these findings.
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.