Treatment effects and periodontal status of chronic periodontitis after routine Er:YAG laser-assisted therapy

BACKGROUND: Routine preclinical interventions for patients with chronic periodontitis such as supragingival cleaning and subgingival curettage, establishing a balanced occlusal relationship, and irrigation with 3% hydrogen peroxide can relieve the symptoms to some extent. However, there is room for improvement in the overall effect. For example, Er:YAG lasers can quickly increase the temperature of the irradiated tissue, effectively eliminate dental plaque and calculus, reduce periodontal pockets, adjust periodontal microecology, and reduce the gingival sulcus. The content of factors in the liquid, and then achieve the purpose of treatment. AIM: The aim was evaluate the effect of Er:YAG laser-assisted routine therapy on the periodontal status in chronic periodontitis. METHODS: Between October 2018 and January 2020, 106 patients with chronic periodontitis in our hospital were randomly assigned to either the study or control group, with 53 patients in each group. The control group underwent routine therapy, and the study group underwent Er:YAG laser therapy in addition to routine therapy. We evaluated the treatment outcome in both groups. Periodontal status was determined by clinical attachment loss (CAL), gingival index (GI), periodontal probing depth (PD), dental plaque index (PLI), and sulcular bleeding index (SBI), inflammatory factors in the gingival crevicular fluid, tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), interleukin-6 (IL-6), IL-8], and colony forming units (CFUs). RESULTS: Total effectiveness in the study group (94.34%) was higher than that in the control group (79.25%, P < 0.05). The clinical parameters in the study group (PD, 5.28 ± 1.08 mm; CAL, 4.81 ± 0.79 mm; SBI, 3.37 ± 0.59; GI, 1.38 ± 0.40; PLI, 2.05 ± 0.65) were not significantly different from those in the control group (PD, 5.51 ± 1.14 mm; CAL, 5.09 ± 0.83 mm; SBI, 3.51 ± 0.62; GI, (1.41 ± 0.37; PLI, 1.98 ± 0.70) before treatment (P > 0.05). However, after treatment, the parameters in the study group (PD, 2.97 ± 0.38 mm; CAL, 2.71 ± 0.64 mm; SBI, 2.07 ± 0.32; GI, 0.51 ± 0.11; PLI, 1.29 ± 0.34) were lower than those in the control group (PD, 3.71 ± 0.42 mm; CAL, 3.60 ± 0.71 mm; SBI, 2.80 ± 0.44; GI, 0.78 ± 0.23; PLI, 1.70 ± 0.51) (P < 0.05). Differences in crevicular TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-8 levels in the study (TNF-α, 7.82 ± 3.43 ng/mL; IL-6, 11.67 ± 2.59 ng/mL; IL-8, 12.12 ± 3.19 pg/mL) and control groups (TNF-α, 9.06 ± 3.89 ng/ml, IL-6, 12.13 ± 2.97 ng/mL, IL-8, 10.99 ± 3.30 pg/mL) before therapy (P > 0.05) were not significant. Following treatment, the parameters were significantly lower in the study group (TNF-α, 2.04 ± 0.89 ng/mL; IL-6, 4.60 ± 1.26 ng/mL; IL-8, 3.15 ± 1.08 pg/mL) than in the control group (TNF-α, 3.11 ± 1.07 ng/mL; IL-6, 6.25 ± 1.41 ng/mL; IL-8, 4.64 ± 1.23 pg/mL, P < 0.05). The difference in the CFU of the study group [(367.91 ± 74.32) × 10(4)/mL and control group (371.09 ± 80.25) × 10(4)/mL] before therapy was not significant (P > 0.05). The CFU decreased in both groups following therapy, however, the CFU values were lower in the study group [(36.09 ± 15.26) × 10(4)/mL] than in the control group [(45.89 ± 18.08) ×10(4)/mL] (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Combining Er:YAG lasers with routine measures significantly improved the overall periodontal therapy outcomes by improving periodontal status and reducing oral levels of inflammatory factors and CFUs.