Photodynamic Disinfection in the Treatment of Chronic Adult Periodontitis: A Multicenter Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Scaling and root planing (SRP) has been used effectively in periodontal therapy for more than 100 years, but produces only modest, transient reductions in bacterial load.Photodisinfection is a bactericidal modality based on the generation of oxidative stress on outer bacterial cell membranes, when light of a matched wavelength illuminates a photosensitive agent near the membrane.The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of photodisinfection as an adjunct to SRP in chronic adult periodontitis.Methods: 121 patients with chronic periodontitis were recruited into a multicenter, randomized, examiner-blinded, parallel-group study.All patients were treated with scaling and root planning (SRP) at all pocket probing sites ≥ 5 mm which exhibited bleeding on probing (BOP).Following SRP the patients were randomized to a no further treatment arm or an antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) arm.The primary endpoint of this study was clinical attachment level (CAL).Secondary endpoints were probing pocket depth (PD) and BOP.aPDT was carried out using a diode laser of 670nm and 0.2W in power.A methylene blue based photosensitizer was used for bacterial staining.Results: Compared to the control arm, the aPDT arm carried a significant improvement in clinical attachment level.aPDT with methylene blue caused a significant decrease in pocket probing depth.These results were apparent at 6-weeks as well as the 12-week follow-up period.Conclusions: aPDT using a methylene based photosensitizer shows a distinct improvement in clinical attachment levels and pocket depth over scaling and root planning alone in the treatment of 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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".