← Human Trials & Peer-Reviewed Studies

Comparative evaluation of combined efficacy of methylene blue mediated antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (a-PDT) using 660 nm diode laser versus Erbium-chromium-yttrium-scandium-gallium-garnet (Er, Cr: YSGG) laser as an adjunct to scaling and root planing on clinical parameters in supportive periodontal therapy: A randomized split-mouth trial

Plain-language guide to PMID 35738551 (2022): double-blind randomized controlled trial study of Methylene blue (non-peptide stack partner).

Key Facts

PMID
35738551
Journal
Photodiagnosis and photodynamic therapy
Year
2022
Study type
Randomized Controlled Trial
Authors
Soundarajan S et al. (2 authors)
DOI
10.1016/j.pdpdt.2022.102971

What This Study Did, in Plain Language

What Was Tested

Researchers studied Methylene blue (non-peptide stack partner) in this randomized controlled trial publication.

Who Took Part

A total of 36 subjected were enrolled.

In each patient, two quadrants constituted the control group (Group I - Scaling and root planing SRP alone), one site in other quadrant constituted the test group 1 (Group II - SRP followed by application of Er, Cr: YSGG laser), and another site in different quadrant constituted the test group 2 (Group III - SRP followed by antimicrobial Photodynamic therapy using diode laser).

How the Study Was Run

In design terms this was a randomized and double-blind study.

The participants were allocated by chance, so the Methylene blue (non-peptide stack partner) group and the comparison group should start out alike.

Blinding on both sides kept the participants and researchers unaware of who received Methylene blue (non-peptide stack partner).

In this split-mouth, double-blind, randomized controlled trial, the researchers compared a-PDT versus Er,Cr:YSGG as an adjunct to scaling and root planning (SRP) with SRP alone in Supportive periodontal therapy.

The diode laser was operated at a peak power of 70 mW using a 0.6 mm diameter fiber-optic tip.

Each site was irradiated with a power density of 28 mW/cm2, for 10 s, thus delivering a total energy of 16.72 J/cm2 per tooth.

The same procedure was repeated at 1st, 2nd and 3rd week for both the laser therapies.

Plaque index (PI), Gingival index (GI), Probing depth (PD,) and Clinical attachment level (CAL) were measured by a single examiner at baseline and 3 months follow up.

What Was Measured

Inter group analysis of the parameters were done using One-way ANOVA and pairwise comparison was carried out by Tukey's post hoc test.

Intra group analysis was performed using Students's paired t test.

The subject headings attached to it are Anti-Infective Agents, Chromium, Chronic Periodontitis, Dental Scaling, Erbium, Gallium and Lasers, Semiconductor.

Author keywords: Antimicrobial photodynamic therapy, Diode laser, Er, Cr: YSGG and Supportive periodontal therapy.

What This Means in Plain Language

The paper is a randomized and double-blind study of Methylene blue (non-peptide stack partner).

The abstract goes on to report its results in about 6 sentences; this page does not restate them, so read the paper for the findings and their limits.

The publication is from 2022 (Photodiagnosis and photodynamic therapy), a journal based in Netherlands.

More context: the Methylene blue (non-peptide stack partner) compound page, all human trials.

Our Notes on the Compound

Methylene blue (non-peptide stack partner): Described as an electron cycler, not just a dye.

Related Pages

Source: PubMed record. This explanation is written by PeptideWhiz from the public record. For research and education only. Not medical advice; no dosing information is given.