Comparison Between the Effect of (650 nm) and (810 nm) Diode Laser Photobiomodulation as an Adjunctive Therapy for Alveolar Socket Preservation: A Clinical and Radiographic Study

Authors

  • Mohamad Anwar Abd-Elhaleem Othman, Ahmed Abbas Zaky, Nesma Mohamed Khalil, Elsayed Abdullah Eltayeb

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47750/pnr.2023.14.03.113

Abstract

Socket preservation aided by laser photobiomodulation is proven to show superior results in comparison to control or placebo standard alveolar socket preservation. Objective of this study Compare between two different lasers as a supportive therapy in alveolar socket preservation procedure. Methodology Twenty extraction sockets were randomly allocated into two equal groups of ten sockets, first group was treated with Diode 650 nm, while the other was treated with Diode 810 nm using the same power and time parameters and following the exact protocol of sessions after standard alveolar socket preservation procedure using collagen plugs. Clinical assessment of socket healing took place by visual scoring during first 15 days’ post extraction, while radiographic analysis by Cone Beam Computed Tomography was used to compare between immediately post extraction and 3 months’ post-operative scans. Results The red laser yielded a higher statistically significant outcome on soft tissue healing. Concerning hard tissue: no significant difference was detected between both test groups. Conclusion Under applied conditions and laser parameters; the 650 nm Diode seems to have better effects on soft tissue healing than the 810 nm. However, regarding bone parameters (socket dimensions & bone density), both showed comparable outcomes when used as an adjunctive therapy in alveolar socket preservation procedure.

Downloads

Published

2023-02-07 — Updated on 2023-02-07

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Comparison Between the Effect of (650 nm) and (810 nm) Diode Laser Photobiomodulation as an Adjunctive Therapy for Alveolar Socket Preservation: A Clinical and Radiographic Study. (2023). Journal of Pharmaceutical Negative Results, 870-883. https://doi.org/10.47750/pnr.2023.14.03.113