Advanced search
Start date
Betweenand
Related content
(Reference retrieved automatically from Web of Science through information on FAPESP grant and its corresponding number as mentioned in the publication by the authors.)

Photodynamic Therapy During Supportive Periodontal Care: Clinical, Microbiologic, Immunoinflammatory, and Patient-Centered Performance in a Split-Mouth Randomized Clinical Trial

Full text
Author(s):
Kolbe, Maria F. [1] ; Ribeiro, Fernanda V. [1] ; Luchesi, Vanessa H. [1] ; Casarin, Renato C. [1] ; Sallum, Enilson A. [2] ; Nociti, Jr., Francisco H. [2] ; Ambrosano, Glaucia M. B. [3] ; Cirano, Fabiano R. [1] ; Pimentel, Suzana P. [1] ; Casati, Marcio Z. [1]
Total Authors: 10
Affiliation:
[1] Univ Paulista, Sch Dent, Dent Res Div, Sao Paulo - Brazil
[2] Univ Estadual Campinas, Sch Dent Piracicaba, Dept Prosthodont & Periodont, Sao Paulo - Brazil
[3] Univ Estadual Campinas, Sch Dent Piracicaba, Dept Social Dent Stat, Campinas, SP - Brazil
Total Affiliations: 3
Document type: Journal article
Source: Journal of Periodontology; v. 85, n. 8, p. E277-E286, AUG 2014.
Web of Science Citations: 31
Abstract

Background: This study investigates the effect of photodynamic therapy (PDT) as monotherapy during supportive periodontal therapy. Methods: A split-mouth, randomized controlled trial was conducted in patients with chronic periodontitis (N = 22) presenting at least three residual pockets (probing depth {[}PD] >= 5 mm with bleeding on probing {[}BOP]). The selected sites randomly received the following: 1) PDT; 2) photosensitizer (PS); or 3) scaling and root planing (SRP). At baseline and 3 and 6 months, clinical, microbiologic (real-time polymerase chain reaction analyses), cytokine pattern (multiplexed bead immunoassay), and patient-centered (regarding morbidity) evaluations were performed. Results: All therapies promoted similar improvements in clinical parameters throughout the study (P <0.05), except that BOP was not reduced in the PS protocol (P >0.05). Lower levels of Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans were observed in the PDT and SRP protocols at 3 months when compared with the PS protocol (P <0.05). An inferior frequency detection of Porphyromonas gingivalis was observed in the PDT protocol at 3 and 6 months and in the SRP protocol at 6 months from baseline (P <0.05). In addition, PDT protocol presented inferior frequency of P. gingivalis at 3 months when compared with the other therapies (P <0.05). Only patients in the PDT protocol exhibited augmented levels of anti-inflammatory interleukin (IL)-4 and reduced proinflammatory IL-1 beta and IL-6 throughout the study (P <0.05). Intergroup analyses showed reduced IL-10 and increased interferon-gamma and IL-1 beta levels in the PS protocol when compared with the other therapies during follow-ups (P <0.05). No differences in morbidity were observed between the therapies (P >0.05), although the need for anesthesia was higher in SRP-treated sites (P <0.05). Conclusion: PDT as an exclusive therapy may be considered a non-invasive alternative for treating residual pockets, offering advantages in the modulation of cytokines. (AU)