Effect of 970 nm low-level laser therapy on orthodontic tooth movement during Class II intermaxillary elastics treatment: a RCT.

This prospective randomized clinical trial aimed to evaluate the effect of low-level laser therapy on tooth movement during Class II intermaxillary elastics treatment. Forty-two patients with Class II malocclusion were included, and their maxillary quadrants were allocated into two groups: treatment with an active diode laser and a placebo group. In each group, the time taken to obtain Class I occlusion after 6 months, rate of movement, total displacement of the maxillary canine to Class I occlusion and pain were recorded. The time to reach Class I occlusion in the active laser group (2.46 ± 2.1 months) was not significantly different from that in the placebo group (2.48 ± 2.0 months) (p = 0.938). Interestingly, the total distance of movement on the active laser side (2.27 ± 1.5 mm) was significantly greater than that on the placebo side (1.64 ± 1.3 mm) (p = 0.009). The pain levels on days 1, 2 and 3 were not significantly different between the laser and placebo sections. The rate of distance change toward Class I occlusion in the laser group (1.1 ± 0.7 mm/month) was significantly higher than that in the placebo group (0.74 ± 0.6 mm/month) (p = 0.037). Low-level laser therapy (970 nm) did not reduce the time needed to obtain Class I occlusion, but a significant acceleration in tooth movement was observed in the irradiated group.Trial registration: NCT02181439. Registered 04 July 2014- https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?term=cinelaser .

Gingival biotype assessement: visual inspection relevance and maxillary versus mandibular comparison.

OBJECTIVE: This clinical study was aimed at evaluating the accuracy of gingival visual inspection procedures during clinical examination and determining whether differences existed between the maxillary and mandibular gingival biotypes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included 53 patients and 124 clinicians. The clinicians were asked to assign to each subject, using photographic documents, one of three biotypes: thin-scalloped, thick-scalloped, or thick-flat gingival biotype. A total of 19716 responses were collected for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Identification accuracy of the gingival biotype and the intra-examiner repeatability presented poor highlighting of the limited relevance of visual inspection. In addition, the percent of agreement between classifications based on the global view of both the maxilla and mandible and the classification based on the individual mandibular or maxillary anterior teeth was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Based on the above results, it can be concluded that a simple visual inspection is not effective for the identification of gingival biotype. Furthermore, evidence suggests that a difference of biotype between the maxilla and the mandible in the same patient is conceivable. Therefore, orthodontic clinical examination should incorporate a reproducible method of determining the individualized gingival biotype for each group of teeth that will be moved.