A Comparative Clinical Study between Concentrated Growth Factor and Low-Level Laser Therapy in the Management of Dry Socket.
| Autor: | Kamal A; College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, UAE.; School of Dental Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Malaysia., Salman B; College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, UAE., Razak NHA; School of Dental Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Malaysia., Samsudin ABR; College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, UAE. |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Zdroj: | European journal of dentistry [Eur J Dent] 2020 Oct; Vol. 14 (4), pp. 613-620. Date of Electronic Publication: 2020 Aug 10. |
| DOI: | 10.1055/s-0040-1714765 |
| Abstrakt: | Objective: A dry socket is a well-recognized complication of wound healing following tooth extraction. Its etiology is poorly understood and commonly occur among healthy patients. As such, management strategies for dry socket has always been empirical rather than scientific with varying outcome. The aim of this study is to investigate the efficacy of concentrated growth factor (CGF) and low-level laser therapy (LLLT) and compared them to the conventional treatment in the management of dry socket. Materials and Methods: Sixty patients with one dry socket each, at University Dental Hospital Sharjah, were divided into three treatment groups based on their choice. In group I ( n = 30), conventional treatment comprising of gentle socket curettage and saline irrigation was done. Group II ( n = 15) dry sockets were treated with CGF and group III ( n = 15) sockets were lased with LLLT. All dry socket patients were seen at day 0 for treatment and subsequently followed-up at 4, 7, 14, and 21 days. Pain score, perisocket inflammation, perisocket tenderness, and amount of granulation tissue formation were noted. Statistical Analysis: Data were analyzed as mean values for each treatment group. Comparisons were made for statistical analysis within the group and among the three groups to rank the efficacy of treatment using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Statistically significant difference is kept at p < 0.05. Results: Conventional treatment group I took more than 7 days to match the healing phase of group II CGF treated socket and group III LLLT irradiated socket ( p = 0.001). When healing rate between CGF and LLLT are compared, LLLT group III showed a delay of 4 days compared with CGF in granulation tissue formation and pain control. Conclusion: CGF treated socket was superior to LLLT in its ability to generate 75% granulation tissue and eliminate pain symptom by day 7 ( p = 0.001). Competing Interests: None declared. |
| Databáze: | MEDLINE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|