Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 6 minor 35 references

Effects of diode laser photobiomodulation on peri-implant inflammation and stability in orthodontic mini-implants: A randomized controlled trial

T0 review · 5 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Adjunctive diode laser therapy at 650 nm and 25 mW significantly reduces peri-implant inflammation and mucositis in orthodontic mini-implants, a 30-patient randomized split-mouth trial reports.

desk verdict A plausible split-mouth RCT of LED therapy for mini-implant inflammation, but reporting gaps—especially no blinding description—make the subjective endpoints hard to trust. read the letter →

arxiv 2511.11128 v1 pith:PAUPZICH submitted 2025-11-14 physics.med-ph q-bio.BM

Jun Liu , Linlin Li , Xiaofei Sun , Qiang Zhang This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.med-phq-bio.BM
keywords photobiomodulationlow-levellasertherapydiodeorthodonticmini-implantsperi-implantitisperi-implantmucositisIL-1βrandomizedcontrolledtrial
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper tests whether brief, low-power red laser irradiation around orthodontic mini-implants improves peri-implant health. In 30 patients with bilateral maxillary mini-implants, one side was irradiated with a 650 nm, 25 mW diode laser on days 0, 3, 7, and 14 after placement and again after loading; the other side received simulated irradiation. The irradiated sides showed significantly lower plaque index, modified sulcus bleeding index, probing depth, IL-1β levels, and fewer cases of peri-implant mucositis at 1, 4, and 12 weeks. Implant loosening was less frequent in the laser group but the difference was not statistically significant. The authors conclude that adjunctive diode laser therapy can reduce inflammatory markers and complications associated with mini-implants.

What carries the argument

The active intervention is a low-level diode laser (650 nm wavelength, 25 mW output) delivering an energy density of 15.92 J/cm² to three sites around the mini-implant neck for 20 seconds each. Photobiomodulation — the use of visible or near-infrared light to trigger photochemical rather than thermal responses in tissue — is the proposed biological mechanism, with IL-1β, a key pro-inflammatory cytokine, serving as the molecular marker of the inflammatory state.

What would settle it

A blinded split-mouth trial using calibrated examiners unaware of allocation, identical-looking active and sham laser devices, and objective measures (pressure-calibrated probing, automated IL-1β sampling at standardized sites and times) that fails to reproduce the differences in plaque index, bleeding, probing depth, and IL-1β between laser and sham.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that photobiomodulation with a 650 nm, 25 mW diode laser, delivered for one minute to the peri-implant mucosa on days 0, 3, 7, and 14 after placement and after orthodontic loading, reduces clinical and biochemical signs of peri-implant inflammation in orthodontic mini-implants. In a split-mouth design with 30 patients, the laser side had statistically lower plaque indices, modified sulcus bleeding indices, probing depths, and IL-1β concentrations at 1, 4, and 12 weeks, and only 1 case of peri-implant mucositis versus 5 on the control side. The authors interpret this as evidence that adjunctive laser therapy enhances peri-implant health and reduces complications, while no

Load-bearing premise

The trial's outcome measurements are valid and unbiased — no examiner calibration, allocation concealment, or blinding method is described beyond 'simulated irradiation' for the control group, so the reported differences could partly reflect assessment bias if patients or examiners could tell which side received the laser.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If laser therapy consistently reduces peri-implant mucositis, it may prevent progression to peri-implantitis, the main cause of mini-implant loosening and failure.
  • The protocol is a simple, non-invasive addition to orthodontic care, requiring only a portable low-power diode laser at specified post-operative and post-loading intervals.
  • The reduction in IL-1β suggests photobiomodulation modulates the local inflammatory response, offering a target for mechanistic studies of light-tissue interaction.
  • Since implant stability did not differ significantly, the main short-term benefit is soft-tissue health rather than anchorage strength; longer follow-up is needed to see whether less inflammation eventually improves stability.
  • The split-mouth design controls for patient-level confounders, making the within-patient comparison a useful template for future laser dose-finding trials.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A testable extension is to compare this 650 nm/25 mW protocol against higher fluences or near-infrared wavelengths to map the dose-response curve for peri-implant inflammation.
  • The lack of significant difference in loosening may reflect the small sample (2 vs 3 cases); a larger trial powered on loosening, not inflammatory indices, could determine whether the mucositis reduction translates into anchorage survival.
  • If the anti-inflammatory effect is real, it may generalize to other dental implants or to orthodontic tooth movement, where photobiomodulation already shows effects; the same split-mouth approach could separate these effects.
  • The authors' use of IL-1β as a single sampled cytokine leaves open whether other inflammatory mediators (e.g., TNF-α, IL-6) change in parallel; that is a direct next step.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

5 major / 6 minor

Summary. This manuscript reports a split-mouth randomized controlled trial in 30 adult orthodontic patients with bilateral maxillary mini-implants. One side was randomly assigned to diode laser photobiomodulation (650 nm, 25 mW, applied on days 0/3/7/14 after placement and after loading) and the contralateral side to simulated irradiation. Clinical outcomes (plaque index, modified sulcus bleeding index, probing depth, peri-implant mucositis, mini-implant loosening) and IL-1β in peri-implant crevicular fluid were measured at 1, 4, and 12 weeks. The authors report significantly lower clinical indices and IL-1β in the laser group, fewer mucositis cases, and no significant difference in loosening, concluding that adjunctive diode laser therapy reduces peri-implant inflammation and complications.

Significance. If the findings are valid, the trial would provide clinical evidence supporting photobiomodulation as an adjunct to improve peri-implant health around orthodontic mini-implants. The split-mouth design is a strength, since it controls for patient-level confounders; the use of a sham control and an objective biochemical endpoint (IL-1β) is also appropriate. The direction of effects is consistent across clinical and biochemical measures. However, the manuscript in its current form does not meet reporting standards for a randomized trial: blinding and examiner calibration are not described, baseline data and group-level statistics are absent, no sample-size calculation or trial registration is provided, and at least one reported p-value appears arithmetically incorrect. These issues directly affect the credibility of the central claim.

major comments (5)
  1. [Results (mucositis counts)] The reported mucositis counts — 1/30 in the laser group and 5/30 in the control group — are stated to be significantly different (p<0.05). However, the two-sided Fisher exact test on this 2x2 table yields p≈0.195, and even the one-sided test gives p≈0.097. Thus the data, as reported, do not support p<0.05 for peri-implant mucositis. This is a load-bearing error because mucositis is a primary clinical endpoint and is cited in the conclusion. The authors must correct this statistical claim and revise conclusions accordingly.
  2. [Materials and Methods (blinding/calibration)] The control group is described only as receiving 'simulated irradiation (no power irradiation)'. No statement is made about blinding of patients, operators, or outcome assessors, and no examiner calibration (e.g., kappa statistics) is reported. Plaque index, modified sulcus bleeding index, and probing depth are examiner-dependent subjective measurements, and 650 nm light is visible, so active versus sham sides may be distinguishable. Without masking or calibration, the significant differences in these endpoints could reflect assessment bias. The authors should state whether any blinding was used, and if not, treat these endpoints as high-risk-of-bias and temper the conclusions.
  3. [Results (missing descriptive statistics)] The Methods state that measurement data are expressed as mean±SD, but the Results provide no numeric values, standard deviations, effect sizes, or confidence intervals — only 'lower than control' and references to figures. Baseline values are also absent, so comparability of the two sides at t=0 cannot be assessed. The authors should report full descriptive statistics for all outcomes at all time points and, ideally, mean differences with confidence intervals.
  4. [Materials and Methods (trial design reporting)] No sample-size calculation, allocation concealment, ethics approval, informed consent, or trial registration is mentioned. These are mandatory for a randomized controlled trial in a medical journal. The absence of a sample-size calculation is especially important because the trial appears underpowered for binary outcomes such as mucositis and loosening. The authors should add this information or explicitly state its absence as a limitation.
  5. [Results/Statistics (multiple comparisons)] The analysis tests multiple outcomes across three time points (plaque index, sulcus bleeding index, probing depth, IL-1β, plus mucositis and loosening), each with a significance threshold of α=0.05 and no adjustment for multiple comparisons. This inflates the type I error rate. The authors should either report adjusted p-values, pre-specify a single primary outcome, or clearly label the analyses as exploratory.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] 'simulated radiation' should be 'simulated irradiation' to match the Methods.
  2. [Discussion] The phrase 'improved sulcus bleeding index' should be 'modified sulcus bleeding index'; the abbreviation 'lL-1β' is a typo and should be 'IL-1β'.
  3. [Introduction/Key words] The paper alternates between 'diode laser' and 'light-emitting diode (LED) therapy'. These are different modalities; clarify which was used and use consistent terminology.
  4. [Materials and Methods] 'membranogingival syndesmosis' appears to be a nonstandard term; likely 'mucogingival junction' was intended. Also 'fixed orthodontic patients' should be 'orthodontic patients with fixed appliances'.
  5. [References] References [8] and [9] appear to describe the same work and one is incomplete; check all references for formatting and duplication. Also reference [28] has a malformed DOI.
  6. [Figures] Figures 2–5 are referenced but not included in the manuscript text. Ensure figures show error bars, axis labels, and group/time point definitions.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the paper's conclusions are direct empirical outcomes of a sham-controlled split-mouth RCT, with no fitted parameters or load-bearing self-citation chain.

full rationale

The paper reports a clinical randomized controlled trial and makes no mathematical derivation or modeling claim. The outcomes—plaque index, modified sulcus bleeding index, probing depth, peri-implant mucositis incidence, mini-implant loosening, and IL-1β levels—are measured endpoints compared between active and simulated-irradiation groups. There is no fitted input renamed as a prediction, no quantity defined in terms of the outcome it is said to explain, and no uniqueness theorem or ansatz imported from the authors' prior work. The discussion cites prior studies, including a systematic review by Zhang et al. [22] and a semiconductor-laser study by Li and Duan [28], but these are used as contextual literature support rather than as the logical basis for the reported results; the trial's own sham control supplies the evidence. The absence of described examiner blinding, calibration, and allocation concealment is a genuine methodological limitation that could affect the validity or generalizability of the findings, but it is a bias/risk-of-bias concern, not a circularity concern. The authors explicitly acknowledge limitations such as small sample size and lack of long-term follow-up. Under the stated standard—flagging circularity only when a specific reduction or equation-level equivalence can be exhibited—no circular step exists.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

There are no fitted mathematical parameters; the only chosen-by-hand setting is the laser dose schedule. The clinical conclusions rest on domain assumptions about peri-implantitis pathogenesis, IL-1β as an inflammatory biomarker, split-mouth independence/local effect, and unstated examiner blinding. These are standard but not verified within the paper.

free parameters (1)
  • Laser irradiation dose and schedule = 650 nm, 25 mW, 3 sites × 20 s, total 1 min; days 0, 3, 7, 14 after placement and after loading
    The central claim depends on this specific dose and timing, but no dose-response comparison or optimization is provided; the values are chosen by hand from prior literature or convention.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Peri-implant mucositis is a reversible precursor of peri-implantitis and a valid clinical endpoint for implant health.
    Invoked in the Introduction and Discussion with refs [23,27]; if this causal chain is wrong, the reduced mucositis count loses its stated clinical significance.
  • domain assumption IL-1β concentration in peri-implant crevicular fluid is a valid biochemical marker of peri-implant inflammation.
    Used as the primary biochemical outcome in the Methods and Results, justified by refs [30-33]; biomarker validity is assumed, not independently demonstrated here.
  • domain assumption Laser treatment on one side of the maxilla does not exert systemic anti-inflammatory effects that alter the contralateral control side.
    Required for the split-mouth design to be a valid comparison; the paper does not discuss possible crossover or systemic PBMT effects.
  • domain assumption Subjective clinical indices were collected under conditions of examiner blinding and adequate calibration.
    No calibration, blinding, or allocation concealment is described; the validity of plaque index, bleeding index, and probing depth data depends on this unstated premise.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Effects of diode laser photobiomodulation on peri-implant inflammation and stability in orthodontic mini-implants: A randomized controlled trial." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PAUPZICH

@misc{pith2026251111128,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Effects of diode laser photobiomodulation on peri-implant inflammation and stability in orthodontic mini-implants: A randomized controlled trial},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PAUPZICH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2511.11128}
}
read the original abstract

Peri-implant inflammation in orthodontic mini-implant may lead to patient discomfort and treatment failure. This study aims to evaluate the effects of diode laser application on the health of mini-implant, preventing peri-implantitis and promoting healing. A randomized controlled trial was conducted involving 30 orthodontic patients (12 males and 18 females, aged 18-32) who had mini-implants implanted on both sides of the maxilla for anterior teeth retraction. One side of each patient was assigned to either an experimental group receiving diode laser irradiation (650 nm, 25 mW) at specific postoperative intervals or a control group receiving simulated radiation. Clinical assessments included plaque index, modified sulcus bleeding index, probing depth, and incidence of peri-implant mucositis and implant mobility, measured at 1, 4, and 12 weeks post-implantation. Additionally, interleukin-1 beta (IL-1\b{eta}) levels in peri-implant fluid were analyzed via enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Results indicated that the experimental group exhibited significantly lower plaque indices, sulcus bleeding indices, and probing depths (p < 0.05) compared to the control group. Moreover, the experimental group had fewer cases of peri-implant mucositis (p < 0.05), while differences in implant stability were not statistically significant (p > 0.05). IL-1\b{eta} levels were consistently lower in the experimental group throughout the study duration (p < 0.05). In conclusion, adjunctive diode laser therapy appears to enhance peri-implant health and reduce complications associated with orthodontic mini-implants, suggesting a promising direction for improving patient outcomes in orthodontics. Future research should explore long-term effects and the mechanisms underlying these benefits.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

35 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Factors associated with the stability of titanium screws placed in the posterior region for orthodontic anchorage

    Miyawaki S, Koyama I, Inoue M, et al. Factors associated with the stability of titanium screws placed in the posterior region for orthodontic anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;124: 373 –378. doi: 10.1016/s0889 - 5406(03)00565-1

    doi:10.1016/s0889 2003

  2. [2]

    Light-emitting diode therapy and low -level light therapy are photobiomodulation therapy

    Anders JJ, Arany PR, Baxter GD, Lanzafame RJ . Light-emitting diode therapy and low -level light therapy are photobiomodulation therapy. Photobiomodul Photomed Laser Surg 2019; 37:63–65

    2019

  3. [3]

    Laser for bone healing after oral surgery: systematic review

    Noba C, Mello-Moura ACV, Gimenez T , et al. Laser for bone healing after oral surgery: systematic review. Lasers Med Sci 2018 ; 33:667–674. doi:10.1007/s10103-017-2400-x

    work page doi:10.1007/s10103-017-2400-x 2018

  4. [4]

    Craniofacial Wound Healing with Photobiomodulation Therapy: New Insights and Current Challenges

    Arany PR. Craniofacial Wound Healing with Photobiomodulation Therapy: New Insights and Current Challenges. J Dent Res. 2016 Aug; 95(9):977-84. doi:10.1177/0022034516648939

    work page doi:10.1177/0022034516648939 2016

  5. [5]

    Shedding more light on the short -term effect of low-level laser therapy on pain in tendinopathy: A systematic review with meta - analysis

    Benjamin WDY, Edwin CWL. Shedding more light on the short -term effect of low-level laser therapy on pain in tendinopathy: A systematic review with meta - analysis. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil . 2025 Nov;38(6):1232 -1256. doi: 10.1177/10538127251339104

    work page doi:10.1177/10538127251339104 2025

  6. [6]

    Review of Literature on Low-level Laser Therapy Benefits for Nonpharmacological Pain Control in Chronic Pain and Osteoarthritis

    Robert D, Vinicius T, Francio, C, et al. Review of Literature on Low-level Laser Therapy Benefits for Nonpharmacological Pain Control in Chronic Pain and Osteoarthritis. Altern Ther Health Med. 2018 Sep;24(5):8-10

    2018

  7. [7]

    Spectroscopic and histological evaluation of wound healing progression following Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT)

    Vijendra P , Satish BSR , Subhash C , et al. Spectroscopic and histological evaluation of wound healing progression following Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT). J Biophotonics. 2012 Feb;5(2):168-184. doi: 10.1002/jbio.201100089

    work page doi:10.1002/jbio.201100089 2012

  8. [9]

    Histopathology Findings of Low-Level Laser Therapy Effectiveness on Achilles Tendon Repair in Rabbit Model

    Nima NT , Mehdi M, Vooria T , Zohreh G. Histopathology Findings of Low-Level Laser Therapy Effectiveness on Achilles Tendon Repair in Rabbit Model. Vet Med Sci. 2025 May;11(3):e70347. doi: 10.1002/vms3.70347

    work page doi:10.1002/vms3.70347 2025

Show all 35 references
  1. [10]

    Paulo CLS, Debora LS, Viviane G. et al. Low-level laser therapy attenuates the acute inflammatory response induced by muscle traumatic injury . Free Radic Res. 2016;50(5):503-13. doi: 10.3109/10715762.2016.1147649

    2016

  2. [11]

    The effect of low level laser therapy on tooth movement during canine distalization

    Üretürk SE, Saraç M, Fıratlı S et al. The effect of low level laser therapy on tooth movement during canine distalization. Lasers Med Sci 2017;32(4):757–764. doi: 10.1007/s10103-017-2159-0

    2017 doi

  3. [12]

    Effectiveness of Low- Level Laser Therapy during Tooth Movement: A Randomized Clinical Trial

    Isola G, Matarese M, Briguglio F, et al. Effectiveness of Low- Level Laser Therapy during Tooth Movement: A Randomized Clinical Trial . Materials (Basel). 2019;12(13):2187. doi: 10.3390/ma12132187

    2019 doi

  4. [13]

    Özsoy B, Güldüren K, Kamiloğlu B. Effect of low -level laser therapy on orthodontic tooth movement during miniscrew-supported maxillary molar distalization in humans: a single -blind, randomized controlled clinical trial. Lasers Med Sci. 2023 20;38(1):76. doi: 10.1007/s10103-0...

    2023 doi

  5. [14]

    Effect of light-emitting photobiomodulation therapy on the rate of orthodontic tooth movement: A randomized controlled clinical trial

    Gü ray Y, Yü ksel AS. Effect of light-emitting photobiomodulation therapy on the rate of orthodontic tooth movement: A randomized controlled clinical trial. J Orofac Orthop. 2023;84(Suppl 3):186-199. doi: 10.1007/s00056-022-00425-3

    2023 doi

  6. [15]

    Efficacy of low -intensity laser therapy in reducing treatment time and orthodontic pain: a clinical investigation

    Doshi -Mehta G, Bhad -Patil WA. Efficacy of low -intensity laser therapy in reducing treatment time and orthodontic pain: a clinical investigation. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 141(3):289–297

  7. [16]

    Low-level laser therapy and laser acupuncture therapy for pain relief after initial archwire placement : A randomized clinical trial

    Farzaneh A , Hooman S , Melika H , Erfan B . Low-level laser therapy and laser acupuncture therapy for pain relief after initial archwire placement : A randomized clinical trial . J Orofac Orthop . 2024 Aug;85(Suppl 2):198 -207. doi: 10.1007/s00056-024-00526-1

    2024 doi

  8. [17]

    Effect of Low -Level Laser Therapy on Periodontal Host Cells and a Seven -Species Periodontitis Model Biofilm

    Selma D , Susanne B , Vera M, et al. Effect of Low -Level Laser Therapy on Periodontal Host Cells and a Seven -Species Periodontitis Model Biofilm. Int J Mol Sci. 2025 Jul 16;26(14):6803. doi: 10.3390/ijms26146803

    2025 doi

  9. [18]

    Low-level laser therapy alleviates periodontal age -related inflammation in diabetic mice via the GLUT1/mTOR pathway

    Aimin C, Yuezhang S, Kangjian Zh, et al. Low-level laser therapy alleviates periodontal age -related inflammation in diabetic mice via the GLUT1/mTOR pathway. Lasers Med Sci . 2024 Jan 18;39(1):36. doi: 10.1007/s10103 -024- 03987-3

    2024 doi

  10. [19]

    Comparison of the efficacy of different types of lasers for the treatment of peri-implantitis: a systematic review

    Natto ZS, Aladmawy M, Levi PA Jr, Wang HL . Comparison of the efficacy of different types of lasers for the treatment of peri-implantitis: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2015; 30: 338–345

    2015

  11. [20]

    Pouremadi N, Motaghi A, Safdari R . et al. Clinical Outcomes of Low- level Laser Therapy in Management of Advanced Implant Surgery Complications: A Comparative Clinical Study. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2019 Jan 1;20(1):78-82

    2019

  12. [21]

    Comprehensive Review on Low -Level Laser Therapy in Dentistry

    Sameep S , Ayan C, Anitta RS , et al. Comprehensive Review on Low -Level Laser Therapy in Dentistry. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2024 Dec;16(Suppl 4): S3047- S3049. doi: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_1261_24. Epub 2024 Nov 27

    2024 doi

  13. [22]

    Effect of photobiomodulation therapy on mini-implant stability: a systematic review and meta -analysis

    Zhang B, Huang X, Huo S, et al. Effect of photobiomodulation therapy on mini-implant stability: a systematic review and meta -analysis. Lasers Med Sci. 2021 Oct;36(8):1557-1566. doi: 10.1007/s10103-021-03281-6

    2021 doi

  14. [23]

    Primary prevention of peri -implantitis: managing peri -implant mucositis

    Sø ren J, Tord B, Robert G , et al. Primary prevention of peri -implantitis: managing peri -implant mucositis . J Clin Periodontol. 2015 Apr:42 Suppl 16: S152-7. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12369

    2015 doi

  15. [24]

    Systematic review of the experimental use of temporary skeletal anchorage devices in orthodontics

    Cornelis MA, Scheffler NR, De Clerck HJ, et al . Systematic review of the experimental use of temporary skeletal anchorage devices in orthodontics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;131: S52–S58. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.05.033

    2007 doi

  16. [25]

    A prospective study of the risk factors associated with failure of mini -implants used for ortho -dontic anchorage

    Cheng SJ, Tseng IY, Lee JJ, et al. A prospective study of the risk factors associated with failure of mini -implants used for ortho -dontic anchorage. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004; 19:100–106

    2004

  17. [26]

    Factors associated with the success rate of orthodontic mini-implants placed in the upper and lower posterior buccal region

    Moon CH, Lee DG, Lee HS, et al. Factors associated with the success rate of orthodontic mini-implants placed in the upper and lower posterior buccal region. Angle Orthod 2008; 78:101–106. doi: 10.2319/121706-515.1

    2008 doi

  18. [27]

    Peri-implant mucositis

    Heitz -Mayfield LJA, Salvi GE. Peri-implant mucositis. J Clin Periodontol. 2018 Jun;45 Suppl 20: S237-S245. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12953

    2018 doi

  19. [28]

    Study of Semiconductor laser irradiation on preventing peri- implantitis

    Li Y, Duan XY. Study of Semiconductor laser irradiation on preventing peri- implantitis. LASER J. 2016; 37(4),131-134. doi:10.14016 /j．

    2016

  20. [29]

    Efficacy of nonsurgical mechanical debridement with and without adjunct low-level laser therapy in the treatment of peri-implantitis: a randomized controlled trial

    Fawaz A, Nasser A, Sree LC, et al. Efficacy of nonsurgical mechanical debridement with and without adjunct low-level laser therapy in the treatment of peri-implantitis: a randomized controlled trial. J Oral Implantol . 2020 Oct 1;46(5):526-531. doi: 10.1563/aaid-joi-D-19-00367

    2020 doi

  21. [30]

    A study of interleukin 1 beta levels in peri -miniscrew crevicular fluid (PMCF)

    Monga N, Chaurasia S, Kharbanda OP , et al . A study of interleukin 1 beta levels in peri -miniscrew crevicular fluid (PMCF). Prog Orthod. 2014 Apr 1;15(1):30. doi: 10.1186/s40510-014-0030-4

    2014 doi

  22. [31]

    Influence of orthodontic loading on biomarkers levels around miniscrews

    Spitz A, Teles RP , Nojima LI. Influence of orthodontic loading on biomarkers levels around miniscrews. Arch Oral Biol. 2020 Apr; 112:104668. doi: 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2020.104668

    2020

  23. [32]

    Associations between salivary cytokines and periodontal and microbiological parameters in orthodontic patients

    Yong C , Wing KW , Jayampath CS , et al. Associations between salivary cytokines and periodontal and microbiological parameters in orthodontic patients. Medicine (Baltimore). 2021 Mar 12;100(10): e24924. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000024924

    2021 doi

  24. [33]

    TNF -alpha TGF-beta2 and IL -1beta levels in gingival and peri -implant crevicular fluid before and after de novo plaque accumulation

    Sehierano G, Pejrone G, Brusco P et a1. TNF -alpha TGF-beta2 and IL -1beta levels in gingival and peri -implant crevicular fluid before and after de novo plaque accumulation. [ J] .J Clin Periodontol,2008, 35 (6):532 -538. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2008.01224.x

    2008 arXiv

  25. [34]

    Low level laser therapy: molecular mechanisms of anti -inflammatory and regenerative effects

    Greben AI, Eremin PS, Kostromina EY , et al. Low level laser therapy: molecular mechanisms of anti -inflammatory and regenerative effects . Vopr Kurortol Fizioter Lech Fiz Kult. 2023;100(2):61 -68. doi : 10.17116/kurort202310002161

    2023 doi

  26. [35]

    Diode Laser Irradiation Effects on Miniscrew Stability and IL -1beta and TGF -beta1 Levels: A Split -Mouth Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

    Yassaei S, Kordi S, Aghili H, et al. Diode Laser Irradiation Effects on Miniscrew Stability and IL -1beta and TGF -beta1 Levels: A Split -Mouth Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. J Lasers Med Sci. 2023 Feb 12;14:e3. doi: 10.34172/jlms.2023.03

    2023 doi

  27. [36]

    (2006) Parameters affecting primary stability of orthodontic mini -implants

    Wilmes B, Rademacher C, Olthoff G, Drescher D . (2006) Parameters affecting primary stability of orthodontic mini -implants. J Orofac Orthop. 2006 May;67(3):162-74. doi: 10.1007/s00056-006-0611-z

    2006 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.