Periowave demonstrates bactericidal activity against periopathogens and leads to improved clinical outcomes in the treatment of adult periodontitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Periodontitis affects half of the U.S. population over 50, and is the leading cause of tooth loss after 35. It is believed to be caused by growth of complex bacterial biofilms on the tooth surface below the gumline. Photodynamic therapy, a technology used commonly in antitumor applications, has more recently been shown to exhibit antimicrobial efficacy. We have demonstrated eradication of the periopathogens Porphyromonas gingivalis, Fusobacterium nucleatum, and Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans in vitro using PeriowaveTM; a commercial photodisinfection system. In addition, several clinical studies have now demonstrated the efficacy of this treatment. A pilot study in the U.S. showed that 68% of patients treated with PeriowaveTM adjunctively to scaling and root planing (SRP) showed clinical attachment level increase of >1 mm, as opposed to 30% with SRP alone. In a subsequent larger study, a second PeriowaveTM treatment 6 weeks after initial treatment led to pocket depth improvements of >1.5 mm in 89% of patients. Finally, in the most recent multicenter, randomized, examiner-blinded study conducted on 121 subjects in Canada, PeriowaveTM treatment produced highly significant gains in attachment level (0.88 mm vs. 0.57 mm; p=0.003) and pocket depth (0.87 mm vs. 0.63 mm; p=0.01) as compared to SRP alone. In summary, PeriowaveTM demonstrated strong bactericidal activity against known periopathogens, and treatment of periodontitis using this system produced significantly better clinical outcomes than SRP alone. This, along with the absence of any adverse events in patients treated to date demonstrates that PDT is a safe and effective treatment for adult chronic periodontitis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".