Abstract
The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the effectiveness of low level laser therapy (LLLT) as an adjunct to connective tissue graft (CTG) procedure for the treatment of gingival recession (GR).
The addressed PICO question was; "In patients with Miller Class I or II recession defects (Population), what is the effect of LLLT as adjunct to CTG (Intervention) in comparison to CTG alone (Comparison) on gingival recession depth (Outcome)" Electronic databases were searched up to December 2017. Primary outcomes included gingival recession depth (GRD), whereas secondary outcomes were width of keratinized tissue (WKT) and relative clinical attachment level gain (RCAL). The weighted mean differences (WMD) of outcomes and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for each variable were calculated using random effect model.
Four randomized clinical studies were included. Two studies showed significantly greater improvements with LLLT whereas, 2 studies showed comparable outcomes between LLLT and CTG group. Considering the effects of adjunctive LLLT as compared to CTG, a high degree of heterogeneity for GRD (Q value = 9.40, P = .02, I
=68.11%) and WKT ((Q value = 16.04, P = .001, I
=81.31%) was noticed among both the groups. Meta-analysis showed a statistically significant GRD (WMD= -0.61, 95% CI= -1.23 to 0.004, P = .05) for LLLT + CTG treatment versus CTG alone only.
LLLT improves clinical and patient-centered outcomes of CTG procedures for the treatment of GR remains debatable. However, due to the small number of included studies and high heterogeneity in the laser parameters, precautions must be exercised when interpreting the results of the present systematic review.
Gingival recessions in dentistry are of major esthetic concern. Minimal gingival recessions can be treated by flap operations, but the predictability and stability of the outcomes is debatable. In the present review, low level laser therapy (LLLT) adjunct to connective tissue graft (CTG) depicted a significant improvement in the predictability and stability of root coverage outcomes compared with CTG alone.