Objective: To assess if photobiomodulation (PBM) improves the efficiency of orthodontic treatment with fixedappliance during the alignment stage. Methods: Eighty-nine subjects were included in this trial and randomly assigned for treatment with fixed applianceand PBM group or with fixed appliance only (control group). Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) agebetween 13 and 30 years, (2) permanent dentition, (3) class I malocclusion, (4) lower 6–6 mild crowding measuredon dental cast, (5) no spaces or diastema in the lower arch, (6) no ectopic teeth, (7) nonextractive treatment plan,and (8) no previous orthodontic treatment. PBM was administered in the PBM group every 14 days using theATP38 (Biotech Dental, Alle´e de Craponne, Salon de Provence, France) (72 J/cm2 of fluency for each session).Dental alignment was assessed by visual inspection, and treatment time was defined in days as T2 (date ofassessment of complete dental alignment)–T1 (date of brackets bonding). The number of monthly scheduledappointments was also recorded. All the data underwent statistical analysis for comparison between groups.Results: Treatment time was significantly shorter ( p < 0.001) in the PBM group (203 days) compared with thecontrol (260 days). Consequently, control visits ( p < 0.001) were lower in the PBM group (7) compared with thecontrol group (9). Conclusions: The present findings would confirm that PBM can be used to enhance the efficiency of orthodontictreatment during dental decrowding.

A Comparative Assessment of the Efficiency of Orthodontic Treatment With and Without Photobiomodulation During Mandibular Decrowding in Young Subjects: A Single-Center, Single-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

Lo Giudice A
Primo
Writing – Original Draft Preparation
;
2020-01-01

Abstract

Objective: To assess if photobiomodulation (PBM) improves the efficiency of orthodontic treatment with fixedappliance during the alignment stage. Methods: Eighty-nine subjects were included in this trial and randomly assigned for treatment with fixed applianceand PBM group or with fixed appliance only (control group). Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) agebetween 13 and 30 years, (2) permanent dentition, (3) class I malocclusion, (4) lower 6–6 mild crowding measuredon dental cast, (5) no spaces or diastema in the lower arch, (6) no ectopic teeth, (7) nonextractive treatment plan,and (8) no previous orthodontic treatment. PBM was administered in the PBM group every 14 days using theATP38 (Biotech Dental, Alle´e de Craponne, Salon de Provence, France) (72 J/cm2 of fluency for each session).Dental alignment was assessed by visual inspection, and treatment time was defined in days as T2 (date ofassessment of complete dental alignment)–T1 (date of brackets bonding). The number of monthly scheduledappointments was also recorded. All the data underwent statistical analysis for comparison between groups.Results: Treatment time was significantly shorter ( p < 0.001) in the PBM group (203 days) compared with thecontrol (260 days). Consequently, control visits ( p < 0.001) were lower in the PBM group (7) compared with thecontrol group (9). Conclusions: The present findings would confirm that PBM can be used to enhance the efficiency of orthodontictreatment during dental decrowding.
orthodontic treatment
photobiomodulation
accelerated dental movement
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Photobio Lo Giudice 2020.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Dimensione 278.17 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
278.17 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11769/543290
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 4
  • Scopus 17
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 14
social impact