Photobiomodulation and its Effect on Stability of Orthodontic Mini-implants:
A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials
ZE25-ZE30
Correspondence
Ravindra Kumar Jain,
Saveetha Dental College and Hospital, Saveetha Institute of Medical and
Technical Sciences, Saveetha University 162, Poonamallee High Road,
Chennai-600077, Tamil Nadu, India.
E-mail: ravindrakumar@saveetha.com
Introduction: The influence of Photobiomodulation (PBM) on the field of orthodontics has been of recent interest. The PBM has a promising effect on acceleration of tooth movement, alleviation of pain during orthodontic treatment and Mini-Implant (MI) stability.
Aim: To systematically report on the effectiveness of PBM on the stability of orthodontic MI.
Materials and Methods: This systematic review was conducted during January 2021 and February 2021. Literature search was conducted in five electronic databases for human trials published between January 2000 to February 2021 on the effectiveness of PBM therapy for stability of orthodontic MI. Cochrane review manager software (Revman version 5.4) and Cochrane Risk Of Bias (ROB) 2 tool were used for bias assessment. The primary outcome measured was the stability of MI using Resonance Frequency Analysis (RFA) or Periotest Value (PTV). The secondary outcomes measured were pain and inflammation around the peri-implant area. Also, Interleukin-1β (IL-1β) was also measured in gingival crevicular fluid.
Results: A total of six Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) were included in the review. Out of the six studies, two showed low Risk Of Bias (ROB) whereas three showed some concerns and one showed high ROB. Quantitative analysis was done for four studies with a random effects model to assess the MI stability measured by periotest at 30 days and 60 days. A significant mean difference of -3.31 (95% Confidence Interval [CI]-5.15, -1.47) between PBM and controls for mini-implant stability at 30 days and a significant mean difference of -3.47 (95% CI-4.58, -2.36) between PBM and controls at 60 days with low heterogeneity was obtained. Three studies reported on the pain response after PBM and both groups showed no significant difference. A decrease in gingival inflammation was reported in one study whereas other study showed no significant change in IL-1β in gingival crevicular fluid.
Conclusion: Majority of the studies included in this review reported improved secondary stability with PBM. The low heterogeneous nature of the quantitative studies also supports the data obtained. However, the results should be concluded with caution.