| Title |
Efficacy of Er:YAG laser in the treatment of chronic periodontitis: systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Lasers in Medical Science, May 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10103-011-0928-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fabrizio Sgolastra, Ambra Petrucci, Roberto Gatto, Annalisa Monaco |
| Abstract |
Scaling root planing (SRP) has been proven efficacious as the traditional treatment approach for chronic periodontitis. However, important limitations such as difficult access in deep pockets, grooves, and furcations have led to the development of new therapeutic strategies. The erbium-doped:yttrium-aluminium-garnet (Er:YAG) laser is one of the most promising laser types for periodontal therapy. Its efficacy in radicular debris removal and root smoothing has been proven in vitro. However, the clinical effectiveness of the Er:YAG laser remains controversial. The aim of the present systematic review was to systemically assess the scientific evidence for the effectiveness of Er:YAG laser compared to SRP in the treatment of chronic periodontitis. Electronic database searches of MEDLINE, Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trial Register, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, CINAHL, Science Direct, ISI Web of Science, and SCOPUS were performed, as well as hand-searching of relevant journals through December 23, 2010. Quality assessment was made according to the CONSORT guidelines. The systematic review was performed according to the QUOROM statement and Cochrane Collaboration recommendations. Meta-analyses of the clinical attachment level gain, probing depth reduction, and changes in gingival recession were performed using weighted mean differences for continuous data with 95% confidence intervals, nested in a random effect model. No statistically significant differences were found in any of the investigated clinical parameters among the five random controlled trials (RCTs) entered into the study, indicating that there was no evidence of effectiveness. However, significant heterogeneity, a high risk of bias in three of the five included studies, and methodological shortcomings indicate that the results should be considered with caution. Future long-term, well-designed RCTs are needed to assess the scientific evidence of Er:YAG laser efficacy as an alternative treatment strategy to SRP. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 109 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 15 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 10% |
| Researcher | 9 | 8% |
| Other | 29 | 26% |
| Unknown | 17 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 79 | 71% |
| Psychology | 4 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 2% |
| Engineering | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 3% |
| Unknown | 19 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 August 2012.
All research outputs
#15,248,503
of 22,673,450 outputs
Outputs from Lasers in Medical Science
#650
of 1,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,144
of 110,331 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Lasers in Medical Science
#6
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,673,450 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,303 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 110,331 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.