The effect of low-level laser therapy on orthodontically induced root resorption: A pilot double blind randomized controlled trial

• Main Authors: Chan, A.K (Author), Dalci, O. (Author), Darendeliler, M.A (Author), Ng, D. (Author), Papadopoulou, A.K (Author), Petocz, P. (Author)
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Oxford University Press 2018
• Subjects: adolescent; Adolescent; Bicuspid; controlled study; double blind procedure; Double-Blind Method; female; Female; human; Humans; low level laser therapy; Low-Level Light Therapy; male; Male; orthodontic tooth movement; pathology; Pilot Projects; pilot study; premolar tooth; procedures; radiation response; radiotherapy dosage; Radiotherapy Dosage; randomized controlled trial; Root Resorption; tooth disease; Tooth Movement Techniques
• Online Access: View Fulltext in Publisher
• ISBN: 01415387 (ISSN)
• DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjx065

Background: The effect of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) on accelerating orthodontic tooth movement has been extensively studied; however, there is limited knowledge on the use of LLLT on orthodontic root resorption. Objective: To investigate the effect of LLLT on orthodontically induced inflammatory root resorption (OIIRR) and to compare the difference between pulsed and continuous LLLT on OIIRR. Trial design: Double-blind, single-centre 3-arm parallel split-mouth randomized controlled trial. Participants: Twenty adolescent patients who required bilateral maxillary first premolar (MFP) orthodontic extractions were recruited from the Sydney Dental Hospital between October 2014 and December 2014. Intervention: All MFPs were tipped buccally for 28 days to induce OIIRR. The experimental premolars (n = 20) received LLLT and the control premolars (n = 20) received placebo-laser on days 0, 1, 2, 3, 7, 14, and 21. Ten experimental premolars received LLLT via continuous delivery and 10 received pulsed delivery. Laser parameter: AlGaAs diode laser of 808 nm wavelength, 0.18 W power, 1.6 J per point, and duration of 9s for continuous mode and 4.5 s for pulsed mode. Outcome: The difference in root resorption crater volume between LLLT and placebo-laser and continuous or pulsed laser delivery after 28 days. Randomization: Randomization was computer-generated, with allocation concealment by opaque sequentially numbered sealed envelopes. Blinding: The participants and operator were blinded. Results: Eighty-eight patients were screened and 20 patients were randomized. Forty premolars were analysed. LLLT resulted in 23 per cent less root resorption compared to the placebo (P = 0.026). Pulsed laser delivery resulted in 5 per cent less root resorption than continuous; however, this was not statistically significant (P = 0.823). No harm was observed. Conclusion: Teeth treated with LLLT had less total root resorption than placebo-laser. Furthermore, there was minimal difference between pulsed or continuous delivery of LLLT. © The Author(s) 2018.