Photobiostimulatory Effect of a Single Dose of Low-Level Laser on Orthodontic Tooth Movement and Pain

Periodontal response to nonsurgical accelerated orthodontic tooth movement

Tooth movement is a complex process involving the vascularization of the tissues, remodeling of the bone cells, and periodontal ligament fibroblasts under the hormonal and neuronal regulation mechanisms in response to mechanical force application. Therefore, it will inevitably impact periodontal tissues. Prolonged treatment can lead to adverse effects on teeth and periodontal tissues, prompting the development of various methods to reduce the length of orthodontic treatment. These methods are surgical or nonsurgical interventions applied simultaneously within the orthodontic treatment. The main target of nonsurgical approaches is modulating the response of the periodontal tissues to the orthodontic force. They stimulate osteoclasts and osteoclastic bone resorption in a controlled manner to facilitate tooth movement. Among various nonsurgical methods, the most promising clinical results have been achieved with photobiomodulation (PBM) therapy. Clinical data on electric/magnetic stimulation, pharmacologic administrations, and vibration forces indicate the need for further studies to improve their efficiency. This growing field will lead to a paradigm shift as we understand the biological response to these approaches and their adoption in clinical practice. This review will specifically focus on the impact of nonsurgical methods on periodontal tissues, providing a comprehensive understanding of this significant and understudied aspect of orthodontic care.

Comparative efficacy of pharmaceutical (Ibuprofen) and non-pharmaceutical (photobiomodulation, and chewing gum) interventions for pain reduction after elastomeric separator placement in orthodontic patients: a randomized clinical trial

This study compared the efficacy of pharmaceutical (ibuprofen) and non-pharmaceutical (photobiomodulation and chewing gum) interventions for pain reduction after elastomeric separator placement in orthodontic patients. This 3-arm, parallel-group randomized clinical trial was conducted on 90 orthodontic patients. The level of anxiety and pain threshold of patients were measured at baseline using the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) and an algometer, respectively. The patients were randomly assigned to three groups (n = 30; equal number of males and females). In the laser group, 940 nm diode laser (Epic X, Biolase, USA, 12.35 J/cm2 energy density and 300 mW power in continuous-wave mode., The cross-sectional area of the laser handpiece tip was 1.7 cm2.) was irradiated to the buccal and lingual surfaces for 35 s each, prior to placement of separators. In the gum group, the patients were asked to chew a piece of sugar-free gum immediately after the placement of separators and repeat every 8 h for 5 min for one week in case of pain. In the ibuprofen group, patients received 400 mg ibuprofen (Hakim Pharmaceuticals, Tehran, Iran) after the placement of separators and were asked to take one tablet every 8 h for one week in case of pain. The pain score was recorded using the Modified McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ). The normality of data distribution was analyzed by the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. ANOVA was applied to compare age, and the Chi-square and Monte Carlo Chi-square tests were used to compare gender and patient responses to the questions among the groups. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to compare the pain score at different time points and among the three groups. All statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS version 19 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) at 0.05 level of significance. Data analysis in this study had an intention to treat approach. Although the pain score was slightly lower in ibuprofen and gum groups, the difference among the three groups was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). 'Repeated measures ANOVA showed no significant effect of method of pain reduction on pain score (F = 1.520, P = 0.225). Time had a significant effect on pain score (F = 20.310, P < 0.001). The interaction effect of time and pain reduction method on pain score was not significant (F = 0.737, P = 0.651). patients experienced a lower level of pain in the ibuprofen and chewing gum groups, the difference in pain score was not significant among the three groups (P = 0.225). patients experienced a higher level of pain at 12 and 24 hours after the placement of separators in all groups. Considering the comparably equal analgesic efficacy of this modalities, non-pharmaceutical interventions can be used for pain reduction of elastomeric separator. The study protocol was registered in the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT20210927052611N1). Date of registration 2022/03/14.

Impact of Low-Level Laser Therapy on Orthodontic Tooth Movement and Various Cytokines in Gingival Crevicular Fluid: A Split-Mouth Randomized Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

A few investigations have detailed the influence of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) on orthodontic tooth movement (OTM), with varying results. The objectives of this study were twofold: to assess the impact of LLLT on OTM and various cytokine levels in gingival crevicular fluid and to contrast the pain levels experienced by patients receiving orthodontic treatment with and without LLLT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This split-mouth randomized controlled prospective study comprised 40 patients with an average age of 19.7±2.4 years with Angle Class I malocclusion combined with bimaxillary protrusion who were advised for extraction of the maxillary first premolar and bilateral canine distalization. The control-side canine was distalized solely by the coil spring. On the test arm, a low-level gallium-aluminum-arsenide semiconductor diode laser operating at 980 nm and 100 mW with a continuous-wave energy of 8 J/cm2 was used. The canine distalization on either side was measured with a digital caliper following the first premolar extraction (TO), one month after treatment (TOTM1), two months later (TOTM2), and three months later (TOTM3). The gingival index and the level of various cytokines were determined by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay at the beginning of the study, on the third and seventh days, and at four, eight, and 12 weeks following the canine distalization. The intra-group and inter-group comparisons were carried out using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and t-tests, respectively, at a 5% significance level.

RESULTS

The results show a highly statistically significant difference in the extent of canine distalization in the test group (TOTM1=2.92±0.44; TOTM2=1.04±0.1; TOTM3​=0.62±0.21 mm) in contrast to the control group (TOTM1=3.23±0.8; TOTM2=2.65±0.2; TOTM3​​​​=2.11±0.24 mm) (p<0.01). After three months of canine distalization, the laser and control group had 34 and 27 patients with mild gingivitis, respectively. Interleukin-1β and interleukin-6 concentrations surged with values of 0.74±0.13 and 0.049±0.001 pg/g at seven days following treatment in the laser group, respectively. The difference in tumor necrosis factor concentration between the groups was shown to be highly statistically significant in all treatment phases (p<0.001). The differences in the epidermal growth factor and microglobulin levels were found to be statistically significant within both groups from T0 to T5. The average visual analog scale (VAS) scores at several subsequent evaluations of the laser and control groups were found to be highly statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

The findings imply that when the periodontal microenvironment is stimulated by orthodontic force, several paramount cytokines are released, triggering an ordered sequence of biological processes that appear to expedite OTM with reduced associated pain.

LOW-LEVEL LASER THERAPY MAY REDUCE PAIN ASSOCIATED WITH ORTHODONTIC SEPARATOR PLACEMENT

ARTICLE TITLE AND BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION

Farzan, A. K. Khaleghi (2021). "The Effectiveness of Low-Level Laser Therapy in Pain Induced by Orthodontic Separator Placement: A Systematic Review." J Lasers Med Sci 12: e29.

SOURCE OF FUNDING

None.

TYPE OF STUDY/DESIGN

Systematic review.

Efficacy of Low-Level Laser Therapy in Reducing Pain in the Initial Stages of Orthodontic Treatment

Purpose

There is no consensus about the mechanism and efficacy in alleviating pain of the lower-level laser therapy (LLLT) during orthodontic treatment. This study aimed to evaluate the LLLT effectiveness clinically in reducing pain caused by orthodontic movement that occurs in the early stages of treatment.

Methods

The sample consisted of 54 patients in need of orthodontic treatment divided into two groups. A 28 experimental patients group (initial mean age: 26.84 years old) was undergone gallium-aluminum-arsenide infrared laser application on 12 points for each tooth immediately after the installation of the first alignment archwire, and a 26 patients control group (initial mean age: 29.13 years old) was undergone to no pain control intervention at all. Pain intensity was measured by using a visual analog scale, which was marked pain level (mm) reported in 06, 24, 48, and 72 hours. The perception of pain (beginning, peak, decline, and absence) was evaluated by filling up a questionnaire. To compare the intensity and perception of pain between groups, a nonparametric Mann-Whitney has been performed.

Results

The experimental group showed levels (mm) at 6 (p < 0.001), 24 (p=0.004), and 48 hours (p=0.007) and perception of pain (hours) in the peak (p=0.026), decline (p=0.025), and absence (p=0.008) significantly lower compared to the group control.

Conclusion

Low-level laser therapy is effective in reducing pain severity caused by orthodontic forces activation, and it promotes the analgesic action lasting effect during the most painful feeling time.

A randomized controlled trial evaluating the effect of two low-level laser irradiation protocols on the rate of canine retraction

The objective of this study was to evaluate the canine retraction rate with two low-level laser therapy (LLLT) irradiation protocols, involving both a high and a low application frequency. Twenty patients were randomly divided into two equal groups. In Group A, one side of the maxillary arch randomly received LLLT on days 0, 3, 7, 14, and every 2 weeks thereafter, whereas in Group B, one side received LLLT every 3 weeks. Tooth movement was checked every three weeks since the onset of canine retraction, over the 12-week study period. Moreover, Interleukin-1β (IL-1β) levels in the gingival crevicular fluid were assessed. Results revealed a significant increase in the canine retraction rate on the laser sides of groups A and B, in comparison with the control sides (p < 0.05), with no significant differences reported between the laser sides in both groups (p = 0.08–0.55). Also, IL-1β levels were significantly higher on the laser sides of both groups, in comparison with the control sides (p < 0.05). Therefore, LLLT can effectively accelerate tooth movement, with both frequent and less frequent applications, which is attributed to an enhanced biological response as reflected by the elevated IL-1β levels on the compression sides.

Ectopic Eye Tooth Management: Photobiomodulation/Low-Level Laser Emission Role in Root Resorption after Fixed Orthodontic Treatment

Aim: This study evaluates the role of low-level laser emission/photobiomodulation (LE/P) in quantitative measurements of root resorption (QRR). The application of LE/P performed after each orthodontic activation with four types of treatment intervention (TI) on the root resorption (RR) after fixed orthodontic treatment (FOT) of the upper arch with ectopic eye tooth/teeth [EET] was investigated. Materials and Methods: Thirty-two orthodontic patients scheduled for FOT were selected and assigned to the four groups. These were LE/P + Self ligating bracket (SLB), LE/P + Conventional bracket (CB), non-photobiomodulation (non-LE/P) + SLB and non-LE/P + CB. Standard management stages of FOT were followed in the maxilla. Each patient received a single application of LE/P labially/buccally and palatally, a total of five different points were used during each activation or appointment. The main outcome measure was QRR in maxillary anteriors before and after FOT, assessed via cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) using 3D OnDemand software. Results: Insignificant QRR was found between before and after FOT in SLB, CLB, and LE/P, non-LE/P groups (p > 0.05). QRR in the SLB vs. CB and LE/P vs. non-LE/P group was significantly different in 11, 13, and 23 (p < 0.05). QRR in the LE/P + SLB group (p < 0.05) was significantly different in 11, 13, and 23 than that in the other groups. The most severe QRR was found on 13 (0.88 ± 0.28 mm and 0.87 ± 0.27 mm) and 23 (1.19 ± 0.14 mm and 1.16±0.13 mm) in the CB and non-LE/P group (p < 0.001). LE/P + SLB showed a highly significant superior outcome (p < 0.001) in relation to non-LE/P + CB, the QRR of 23 were 0.813 ± 0.114 mm and 1.156 ± 0.166 mm, respectively. Conclusion: Significantly higher amounts of QRR were found in EET patients after FOT treated with the CB, non-LE/P, and non-LE/P + CB system and warrant further investigation to explore potential specific causes.