4.1 Article

Influence of carbon dioxide laser irradiation on the healing process of extraction sockets

期刊

ACTA ODONTOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA
卷 69, 期 1, 页码 33-40

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.3109/00016357.2010.517556

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. To clarify the healing-promoting effects of carbon dioxide laser irradiation in high and low reactive-level laser therapies (HLLT and LLLT, respectively) on extraction sockets after tooth extraction. Material and methods. Forty-two 5-week-old male Wistar rats were divided into laser irradiation and non-irradiation (control) groups and compared. The laser-irradiation group underwent HLLT immediately after tooth extraction and then LLLT 1 day post-extraction. Tissue was excised 6 h and 3, 7, or 21 days after extraction and histopathologically investigated. The alveolar crest height was measured osteomorphometrically 21 days post-extraction, and granulation tissue in the extraction socket surface layer was immunohistologically investigated using anti-alpha-smooth muscle actin (anti-alpha-SMA) antibody 3 and 7 days post-extraction. Results. Many osteoclasts appeared and active bone resorption was noted in the irradiation group 3 days after extraction compared to the controls. On Day 7, new bone formation started around the extraction socket in the control group, but from the superficial to over the middle layer of the socket in the irradiation group. On Day 21, a concavity existed in the alveolar crest region in the controls, whereas this region was flat, with no concavity, in the irradiation group. On osteomorphometry, the alveolar crest height was significantly higher in the irradiation (0.7791 +/- 0.0122) than the control (0.6516 +/- 0.0181) group (P < 0.05). On immunostaining, many alpha-SMA-positive cells were noted in the control group, but very few in the irradiation group. Conclusion. Laser-irradiated extraction wound healing showed characteristics different from those of the normal healing process, suggesting a favorable healing-promoting effect.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据