Efficacy of mechanical debridement with adjunct antimicrobial photodynamic therapy for the management of peri-implant diseases: a systematic review

Abstract

The aim was to assess whether or not mechanical debridement with adjunct antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) is effective for the management of peri-implant diseases. The addressed focused question was “Is mechanical debridement with adjunct aPDT more effective in treating peri-implant diseases as compared to when mechanical debridement is used alone?” PubMed/MEDLINE and Google-Scholar databases were searched from 1994 till April 2014 using different combinations of the following keywords: antimicrobial photodynamic therapy; bone loss; light activated disinfection; mechanical debridement; and peri-implant diseases. Review articles, case-reports, commentaries, letters to the editor, unpublished articles and articles published in languages other than English were excluded. Twelve studies (six clinical and six experimental) were included. In the clinical and experimental studies, 15–80 implants and 18–150 implants respectively were used. Laser wavelengths, duration of irradiation and power output ranged between 625 nm–830 nm, 10 s–300 s, and 30 mW–200 mW, respectively. Four studies reported mechanical debridement with adjunct aPDT to be effective in the treatment of peri-implant diseases; however, the benefits of aPDT were comparable with conventional treatments. Two studies reported aPDT to reduce bacteria more than when the laser and the photosensitizer were applied alone. In two studies, chemical disinfection and aPDT showed comparable outcomes in terms of bacterial disinfection. In two experimental studies, aPDT was shown to improve bone to implant contact and re-osseointegration. Efficacy of mechanical debridement with adjunct aPDT for the management of peri-implant diseases remains debatable.