Do Antimicrobial Photodynamic Therapy and Low-Level Laser Therapy Influence Oral Health-Related Quality of Life After Molar Extraction?

PURPOSE: Most individuals experience significant deterioration in their oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) in the first few days after tooth extraction. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) and low-level laser therapy (LLLT) protocols on OHRQoL after extraction of lower molars. METHODS: The investigators designed a double-blind, randomized controlled clinical trial study. Patients with indications for lower molar extraction were included in the study and randomized into four groups: control group, antimicrobial photodynamic therapy group, LLLT group (LLLT.G), and aPDT and LLLT group (aPDT + LLLT.G).The Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) questionnaire was used through an interview with the participants before the extraction (T0 - baseline) and on the 7th (T1) and 30th (T2) days after extraction. Other variables were age, sex, ethnicity, decayed-missing-filled teeth (DMFT) and tooth types. Appropriate univariate and bivariate statistics were computed, and statistical significance was set at a value P < .05. RESULTS: The sample was composed of 40 patients with a mean age of 41.25 ± 13.97 and 25 (62.5%) were women. The mean OHIP-14 scores were significantly different in the intervals at T0 versus T1 and T0 versus T2 for all domains (P < .001), demonstrating a positive impact on the OHRQoL. The total scores indicated a significant improvement in the OHRQoL in the aPDT (7.10, standard deviation 4.18, P = .043), LLLT (6.40, SD 5.87, P = .025), and aPDT + LLLT (5.30, SD 3.59, P = .012) groups compared to that in the control group (12.90, SD 6.64) at T1. Patients undergoing extraction of lower mandibular molars with aPDT + LLLT had the lowest mean OHIP-14 total score at T1 (5.30) and T2 (0.70). CONCLUSION: The aPDT and LLLT protocols had a positive impact on the participants' OHRQoL. These procedures can be applied in everyday surgical practice.

Evaluation of composite restorations in primary molars subjected to selective caries removal associated with antimicrobial photodynamic therapy: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) has been used as an adjunct treatment of deep caries lesions; however, studies on the effects of aPDT on the longevity of restorations are still limited. AIM: To evaluate the clinical performance of composite restorations in primary molars subjected to selective caries removal (SCR) associated with aPDT. DESIGN: A randomized clinical trial was designed. Primary molars of patients (mean age 6.15 years) with deep caries lesions without signs and symptoms of pulpal involvement were selected. A total of 64 teeth were randomly divided into groups G1 (SCR, 32 teeth) and G2 (SCR + aPDT, 32 teeth) for treatment, restored with composite, and evaluated after a week (T0 ), 6 months (T1 ), and 12 months (T2 ) according to the criteria of FDI. Groups were compared using the Rao-Scott chi-squared test and the logistic regression analysis for complex designs to account for multiple observations per subject (alpha = 0.05). RESULTS: From all FDI criteria evaluated, the marginal adaptation for the SCR + aPDT group was significantly better in comparison with the SCR group at T0 and T2 in the logistic regression analysis (T0: OR = 0.151; 95% CI = 0.03-0.068, P = .015; and T2: OR = 0.201; 95% CI = 0.05-0.79, P = .022). CONCLUSION: The marginal adaptation of primary molar resin restorations was positively affected by aPDT after 12 months of follow-up.

Do Antimicrobial Photodynamic Therapy and Low-Level Laser Therapy Minimize Postoperative Pain and Edema After Molar Extraction?

PURPOSE: This study was designed to examine the efficacy of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) and low-level laser therapy (LLLT) in reducing postoperative pain and edema after molar extractions. METHODS: The investigators designed a single-blind randomized controlled study and enrolled subjects requiring extraction of at least one of the first or second molars. They were randomized to one of the following four groups: control group, aPDT group, LLLT group, and aPDT and LLLT group. Patients were blinded to the group assigned. The outcome variables were postoperative pain and edema. Pain intensity was measured on a visual analog scale (recorded every day for 7 days after tooth extraction). Facial edema was assessed by measuring the perimeter between the tragus, base of the jaw, and labial commissure, which was recorded once before surgery and then on the third and seventh days after surgery. Other variables were age, sex, ethnicity, decayed/missing/filled teeth, and tooth types. Appropriate univariate and bivariate statistics were computed and statistical significance was set at a value of P < .05. RESULTS: The sample was composed of 40 patients with a mean age of 41.25 ± 13.97 years and 25 (62.5%) of them were women. There were 10 subjects in each treatment group. The mean of postoperative pain within the groups was associated with a significant continuous decrease over time (P < .05). Postoperative pain was lowest in the aPDT + LLLT group in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 6th, and 7th day after tooth extraction (P < .05). There were no significant differences in edema among the groups (P > .05). CONCLUSION: The combined use of aPDT and LLLT was effective in reducing postoperative pain. These procedures can be applied in everyday surgical practice.