Low-level laser therapy, piezocision, or their combination vs. conventional treatment for orthodontic tooth movement : A hierarchical 6-arm split-mouth randomized clinical trial.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics-Fortschritte Der Kieferorthopadie Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2022-09-21 DOI:10.1007/s00056-022-00427-1
Mehrnaz Moradinejad, Rayan Chaharmahali, Milad Shamohammadi, Maziar Mir, Vahid Rakhshan
{"title":"Low-level laser therapy, piezocision, or their combination vs. conventional treatment for orthodontic tooth movement : A hierarchical 6-arm split-mouth randomized clinical trial.","authors":"Mehrnaz Moradinejad, Rayan Chaharmahali, Milad Shamohammadi, Maziar Mir, Vahid Rakhshan","doi":"10.1007/s00056-022-00427-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The use non-invasive or minimally invasive methods to accelerate orthodontic tooth movements (OTM) is desirable. In this regard, low-level laser therapy (LLLT, photobiomodulation) and piezocision are suggested. However, because the efficacies of these methods remain controversial/inconclusive, we investigated and compared these two methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sixty-four quadrants in 32 patients were randomized into three parallel intervention groups of 22, 22, and 20 (6 parallel arms, n = 64 treatment/control sides). Bilateral first premolars were extracted and canine retraction commenced. In each group, one side of the mouth was randomly selected as control, while the other side underwent each of three interventions: LLLT (940 nm, 8 J, 0.5 W, 16 s, 12 sites), piezocision, and \"LLLT + piezocision\". At the 3rd, 6th, and 9th follow-up weeks, canine retraction and anchorage loss were measured. Data were analyzed statistically (α = 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After 9 weeks, LLLT, piezocision, and LLLT + piezocision improved canine retraction by 0.51, 1.14, and 1.93 mm, respectively. LLLT accelerated canine retraction (compared to control) by 1.6-, 1.4-, and 1.2-fold in the 3rd, 6th, and 9th week, respectively. These statistics were 2.1-, 1.7-, and 1.5-fold for piezocision and 2.7-, 2.1-, and 1.8-fold for LLLT + piezocision. Compared to controls, each intervention showed significant retraction acceleration (p < 0.05). The effect of LLLT + piezocision was greater than that of isolated piezocision (p < 0.05), which itself was greater than that for isolated LLLT (p < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>All three methods accelerated OTM, with the combination of LLLT + piezocision producing the strongest and LLLT producing the weakest acceleration.</p>","PeriodicalId":54776,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics-Fortschritte Der Kieferorthopadie","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics-Fortschritte Der Kieferorthopadie","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-022-00427-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/9/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The use non-invasive or minimally invasive methods to accelerate orthodontic tooth movements (OTM) is desirable. In this regard, low-level laser therapy (LLLT, photobiomodulation) and piezocision are suggested. However, because the efficacies of these methods remain controversial/inconclusive, we investigated and compared these two methods.

Methods: Sixty-four quadrants in 32 patients were randomized into three parallel intervention groups of 22, 22, and 20 (6 parallel arms, n = 64 treatment/control sides). Bilateral first premolars were extracted and canine retraction commenced. In each group, one side of the mouth was randomly selected as control, while the other side underwent each of three interventions: LLLT (940 nm, 8 J, 0.5 W, 16 s, 12 sites), piezocision, and "LLLT + piezocision". At the 3rd, 6th, and 9th follow-up weeks, canine retraction and anchorage loss were measured. Data were analyzed statistically (α = 0.05).

Results: After 9 weeks, LLLT, piezocision, and LLLT + piezocision improved canine retraction by 0.51, 1.14, and 1.93 mm, respectively. LLLT accelerated canine retraction (compared to control) by 1.6-, 1.4-, and 1.2-fold in the 3rd, 6th, and 9th week, respectively. These statistics were 2.1-, 1.7-, and 1.5-fold for piezocision and 2.7-, 2.1-, and 1.8-fold for LLLT + piezocision. Compared to controls, each intervention showed significant retraction acceleration (p < 0.05). The effect of LLLT + piezocision was greater than that of isolated piezocision (p < 0.05), which itself was greater than that for isolated LLLT (p < 0.05).

Conclusion: All three methods accelerated OTM, with the combination of LLLT + piezocision producing the strongest and LLLT producing the weakest acceleration.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
低强度激光疗法、压电陶瓷疗法或它们的组合与传统疗法在正畸牙齿移动中的对比 :分层 6 臂分口随机临床试验。
目的:使用无创或微创方法来加速正畸牙齿移动(OTM)是可取的。在这方面,有人建议使用低水平激光疗法(LLLT,光生物调制)和压电切削法。然而,由于这些方法的疗效仍存在争议/尚无定论,我们对这两种方法进行了研究和比较:将 32 名患者的 64 个象限随机分为 22、22 和 20 三个平行干预组(6 个平行臂,n = 64 治疗/对照侧)。拔除双侧第一前磨牙并开始犬齿牵引。在每组中,一侧口腔被随机选作对照组,另一侧口腔分别接受三种干预:LLLT (940 nm, 8 J, 0.5 W, 16 s, 12 sites)、piezocision 和 "LLLT + piezocision"。在第 3、6 和 9 周的随访中,测量了犬齿回缩和锚定损失。数据经统计学分析(α = 0.05):9 周后,LLLT、压电切削和 LLLT + 压电切削可使犬齿回缩分别增加 0.51、1.14 和 1.93 mm。与对照组相比,LLLT 在第 3 周、第 6 周和第 9 周将犬齿回缩速度分别提高了 1.6 倍、1.4 倍和 1.2 倍。压电切削法的这些数据分别为 2.1 倍、1.7 倍和 1.5 倍,LLLT + 压电切削法的这些数据分别为 2.7 倍、2.1 倍和 1.8 倍。与对照组相比,每种干预方法都显示出明显的回缩加速作用(p 结论:与对照组相比,每种干预方法都显示出明显的回缩加速作用:所有三种方法都能加速 OTM,其中 LLLT + 压电切削的组合产生的加速效果最强,而 LLLT 产生的加速效果最弱。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
64
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics provides orthodontists and dentists who are also actively interested in orthodontics, whether in university clinics or private practice, with highly authoritative and up-to-date information based on experimental and clinical research. The journal is one of the leading publications for the promulgation of the results of original work both in the areas of scientific and clinical orthodontics and related areas. All articles undergo peer review before publication. The German Society of Orthodontics (DGKFO) also publishes in the journal important communications, statements and announcements.
期刊最新文献
Correction to: Influence of functional and esthetic expectations on orthodontic pain. Mitteilungen der DGKFO. Dentoskeletal effects of clear aligner vs twin block-a short-term study of functional appliances. Evaluation and comparison of planum clival angle in three malocclusion groups : A CBCT study. Survival rates of mandibular fixed retainers: comparison of a tube-type retainer and conventional multistrand retainers : A prospective randomized clinical trial.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1