Integrating Low-Level Laser Therapy with Flap Surgery for Intrabony Defects

Integrating Low-Level Laser Therapy with Flap Surgery for Intrabony Defects - Low level laser therapy for Intrabony Defects

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Interventional

Source

JPRN

Registry ID

JPRN-UMIN000053292

Enrollment

128

Registered

2024-01-12

Start date

2022-08-01

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2026-06-29

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Intrabony Defects Periodontla disease

Interventions

Low level laser therapy during flap surgery for Intrabony defects Standard periodontal flap surgery

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Eligible participants were individuals diagnosed with moderate to severe periodontitis, presenting with intrabony defects

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Exclusion criteria comprised contraindications to LLLT, systemic conditions affecting periodontal health, and inability to comply with study requirements.

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Primary Outcomes: Probing Depth (PD) Assessment: Preoperative baseline measurements of PD were recorded at six sites per tooth using a calibrated periodontal probe. Follow-up measurements were taken at 3, 6, and 12 months post-surgery to evaluate changes in PD and assess the treatment's impact on periodontal pocket depth. Clinical Attachment Level (CAL) Evaluation: Initial CAL measurements were recorded at the same six sites per tooth, measuring from the cementoenamel junction to the base of the pocket. Subsequent CAL assessments were conducted at the 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month follow-ups to determine alterations in attachment levels and quantify the success of the intervention. Gingival Recession Measurement: Gingival recession was assessed at baseline and during follow-up visits by measuring the distance from the gingival margin to the cementoenamel junction. Changes in gingival recession were documented at the 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month intervals to ascertain any treatment-related effects on soft tissue recession.	—

Measure

Time frame

Primary Outcomes: Probing Depth (PD) Assessment: Preoperative baseline measurements of PD were recorded at six sites per tooth using a calibrated periodontal probe. Follow-up measurements were taken at 3, 6, and 12 months post-surgery to evaluate changes in PD and assess the treatment's impact on periodontal pocket depth. Clinical Attachment Level (CAL) Evaluation: Initial CAL measurements were recorded at the same six sites per tooth, measuring from the cementoenamel junction to the base of the pocket. Subsequent CAL assessments were conducted at the 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month follow-ups to determine alterations in attachment levels and quantify the success of the intervention. Gingival Recession Measurement: Gingival recession was assessed at baseline and during follow-up visits by measuring the distance from the gingival margin to the cementoenamel junction. Changes in gingival recession were documented at the 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month intervals to ascertain any treatment-related effects on soft tissue recession.

—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
Secondary Outcomes: Pain Scores: Patient-reported pain scores were collected using a standardized visual analog scale (VAS). Participants recorded pain levels at specific postoperative time points (24 hours, 72 hours, 1 week, and 2 weeks) to capture the immediate and short-term impact of the combined surgical and LLLT intervention. Overall Satisfaction: Overall patient satisfaction was assessed through structured questionnaires, probing aspects such as aesthetics, functional improvement, and general contentment with the treatment outcome. Surveys were administered at the 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month follow-ups to gauge the participants' long-term satisfaction with the intervention.	—

Measure

Time frame

Secondary Outcomes: Pain Scores: Patient-reported pain scores were collected using a standardized visual analog scale (VAS). Participants recorded pain levels at specific postoperative time points (24 hours, 72 hours, 1 week, and 2 weeks) to capture the immediate and short-term impact of the combined surgical and LLLT intervention. Overall Satisfaction: Overall patient satisfaction was assessed through structured questionnaires, probing aspects such as aesthetics, functional improvement, and general contentment with the treatment outcome. Surveys were administered at the 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month follow-ups to gauge the participants' long-term satisfaction with the intervention.

—

Countries

Asia(except Japan)

Contacts

Public ContactHiroj Bagde

Rama Dental college hospital and research centre Periodontology

hirojbagde8@gmail.com9766105900

Outcome results

None listed

Source: JPRN (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Jul 3, 2026