Can Low-Level Laser and Light-Emitting Diode Enhance the Stability of Dental Implants?

Comparative efficacy of LLLT and LED therapy on osteoblast proliferation and osteoclast suppression: An in vitro co-culture study

Background

Dental implants are a reliable solution for tooth loss, but challenges remain regarding osseointegration and complications. Photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT), including Low-Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) and Light Emitting Diode (LED) therapy, has shown potential in enhancing bone healing. However, comparative studies on their effects on osteoblasts and osteoclasts are limited.

Aim

To compare the effects of LLLT and LED therapy on osteoblast proliferation and osteoclast suppression in an in vitro co-culture model.

Materials and methods

MG-63 osteoblast-like cells and RAW 264.7 osteoclasts were co-cultured on titanium discs. Discs were treated with LLLT (940 nm, 50 mW) or LED (660 nm, 89 mW) for different durations. Osteoblast proliferation was measured by MTT assay, and osteoclast activity was evaluated using TRAP staining and resorption pit analysis.

Results

LED therapy significantly enhanced osteoblast proliferation and suppressed osteoclast activity more effectively than LLLT. Optimal results were observed with a 6-min LED exposure.

Conclusion

LED therapy shows greater potential than LLLT for promoting osteoblast proliferation and suppressing osteoclast activity, indicating its clinical value for improving bone regeneration and implant integration.

The effect of photobiomodulation therapy on implant stability: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This study was designed to determine the effect of photobiomodulation therapy on dental implant stability. A complete systematic search was performed in PUBMED/MEDLINE, COCHRANE library databases, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Google Scholar databases on articles published until June 2024. All the RCTs and CCTs reported the solo impact of photobiomodulation on dental implant stability in humans were included. The means and standard deviation for implant stability and sample size were extracted for the meta-analysis. The statistical analysis was conducted using Stata 17 software, and random effect models were applied to assess the source of heterogeneity. The I2 statistic was used to estimate the significance of any discrepancies in the therapy result. After a full-text inspection, 17 articles were qualified for systematic review, and 14 were included in the meta-analysis. Statically significant differences in implant stability were observed between the laser and the control groups on weeks 2 in ISQ reporting groups (p = 0.01, CI 95%) and weeks 4 and 8 in PTV reporting groups (p < 0.001, CI 95%). Despite limitations, the study suggests that PBM therapy benefits patients with dental implants at different periods, particularly during the early phases of healing.

Effect of photobiomodulation therapy on mini-implant stability: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The study aimed to assess trials investigating the effect of PBMT on mini-implant stability. Electronic searches of seven databases and manual search were conducted up to May 2020. Randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials evaluating the effect of PBMT on mini-implant stability were included. The risks of bias of individual studies were performed using ROB 2.0 and ROBINS-I-tool based on different study design. Meta-analysis was conducted to compare mini-implant stability exposed to PBMT with control ones at different time points after implantation. Among the 518 records initially identified, seven studies were included in this study. Six studies investigated low-level laser therapy (LLLT) and one study evaluated light-emitting diode (LED) therapy. Two studies were eligible for meta-analysis, which showed that LLLT significantly improved mini-implant stability 60 days after initial implantation (MD - 3.01, 95% CI range [- 4.68, - 1.35], p = 0.0004). High energy density of LLLT began to show beneficial effect on mini-implant stability as early as 3 days after implantation, while the significant effect of low energy density displayed later than 30 days after insertion. LED therapy could improve mini-implant stability after 2 months post-insertion. In conclusion, PBMT appears to be beneficial in ameliorating mini-implant stability. High energy density of LLLT might exert more rapid effect than low energy density. More high-quality clinical trials are needed to further demonstrate PBMT' effects on orthodontic mini-implants.

The stability of implants and microbiological effects following photobiomodulation therapy with one-stage placement: A randomized, controlled, single-blinded, and split-mouth clinical study

BACKGROUND

Studies have reported a positive effect on bone healing and the elimination of microorganisms placed on the titanium implants, while others have not confirmed the positive photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) effects on bone regeneration and bone structure around the implants.

PURPOSE

The aim of the present study was to address the following questions: Does PBMT improve implant stability and affect microbiota around dental implants in the early stage of osseointegration?

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was designed as randomized-controlled prospective, split mouth, single-blinded clinical trial. Implants were randomly divided into two groups and implants placed in the test group were treated with Gallium-aluminum-arsenide (GaAlAs) diode laser with PBMT immediately after surgery and for 15 days (n = 47). In the control group, implants were not irradiated(n = 46). The primary stability of the implants was measured by the Resonance frequency analysis (RFA) after insertion and the secondary stability values were recorded at 30th, 60th, and 90th days after surgery as implant stability quotient (ISQ). The hand-held RFA was held perpendicular to the jaw line as indicated by the manufacturer for buccal-lingual (BL), mesial-distal (MD), and lingual-buccal (LB) measurement and different measurements were analyzed as separately.

RESULTS

Significantly higher magnetic RFA values were achieved on the 90th day in all measurement sides for both groups. ISQ levels in groups at baseline and the day-30, 60, and 90. ISQ readings were not statistically significant between test and control groups for each time point. A statistically significant increase in ISQ reading for BL, MD, and LB dimensions in both groups was noted from baseline to the day-90 (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

It was concluded that PBMT did not have a clinically significant effect on implant stabilization, especially in terms of ISQ values at early alveolar bone healing term. Clinical trial number is NCT04495335.