Effectiveness of laser-assisted gingivectomy compared to surgical methods: a systematic review
Background: Lasers have demonstrated their potential as an effective alternative to the scalpel for gingivectomy procedures. Therefore, it is essential to evaluate their efficacy and safety. This article summarizes human studies comparing the effectiveness of laser-assisted gingivectomy with convent...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Open Exploration Publishing Inc.
2025-05-01
|
| Series: | Exploration of Medicine |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.explorationpub.com/uploads/Article/A1001325/1001325.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850239775940804608 |
|---|---|
| author | Omar Hamadah Saed Almahayni Raghad Ghazzawi Radek Mounajjed Walid Altayeb Marwa Khalil |
| author_facet | Omar Hamadah Saed Almahayni Raghad Ghazzawi Radek Mounajjed Walid Altayeb Marwa Khalil |
| author_sort | Omar Hamadah |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background: Lasers have demonstrated their potential as an effective alternative to the scalpel for gingivectomy procedures. Therefore, it is essential to evaluate their efficacy and safety. This article summarizes human studies comparing the effectiveness of laser-assisted gingivectomy with conventional surgical methods. Methods: A comprehensive electronic search was conducted in Cochrane, PubMed/MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar using the terms “Gingivectomy”, “Gingivoplasty”, “Crown lengthening”, “Gingival surgery”, and “LASER” to identify human studies that compared laser-assisted gingivectomy with traditional surgical methods up until December 2022. The inclusion criteria were as follows: English language, use of laser as the primary treatment tool, and study designs including randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials, clinical trials, and comparative studies. Results: Twenty-two studies met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Diode lasers (810–940 nm) and Erbium, chromium-doped yttrium scandium gallium garnet laser (Er,Cr:YSGG) lasers caused less postoperative pain than conventional flap surgery, while the neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd:YAG) laser resulted in higher initial pain. The diode 808 nm laser yielded mixed results—one study reported pain levels comparable to those of scalpels, while another noted reduced pain with laser use. However, one study indicated greater use of analgesics in laser-treated patients, suggesting increased discomfort. Lasers, particularly carbon dioxide (CO2) and diode 810 nm lasers, provided superior hemostasis compared to scalpels, with the Er,Cr:YSGG laser in flapless osteotomy minimizing bleeding. Additionally, no sutures were required in the laser-treated groups. The stability of the gingival margins after laser treatment was found to be similar to that of the scalpel. Discussion: All lasers discussed in this article can be safely and effectively used for gingivectomy as an alternative to conventional surgical methods. Laser treatment demonstrated superior clinical outcomes in terms of pain, patient satisfaction, hemostasis, recovery period, and periodontal health. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-97d040e64eef4ffc84f9dd1631232df0 |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 2692-3106 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-05-01 |
| publisher | Open Exploration Publishing Inc. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Exploration of Medicine |
| spelling | doaj-art-97d040e64eef4ffc84f9dd1631232df02025-08-20T02:01:04ZengOpen Exploration Publishing Inc.Exploration of Medicine2692-31062025-05-016100132510.37349/emed.2025.1001325Effectiveness of laser-assisted gingivectomy compared to surgical methods: a systematic reviewOmar Hamadah0https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2308-0547Saed Almahayni1Raghad Ghazzawi2Radek Mounajjed3https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9194-6923Walid Altayeb4Marwa Khalil5https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4100-7853Department of Oral Medicine, Faculty of Dentistry, Damascus University, Damascus 0100, Syrian Arab Republic; The Higher Institute for Laser Research and Applications, Damascus University, Damascus 0100, Syrian Arab RepublicThe Higher Institute for Laser Research and Applications, Damascus University, Damascus 0100, Syrian Arab RepublicThe Higher Institute for Laser Research and Applications, Damascus University, Damascus 0100, Syrian Arab RepublicInstitute of Dentistry and Oral Science, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Palacky University, Olomouc 77147, Czechia; DCM Clinic, Hradec Kralove 50301, CzechiaMaster laser Dentistry, Universita Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, 00168 Rome, ItalyDepartment of Oral Medicine, Faculty of Dentistry, Al-Andalus University, Qadmous town 02400, Tartous Governorate, Syrian Arab RepublicBackground: Lasers have demonstrated their potential as an effective alternative to the scalpel for gingivectomy procedures. Therefore, it is essential to evaluate their efficacy and safety. This article summarizes human studies comparing the effectiveness of laser-assisted gingivectomy with conventional surgical methods. Methods: A comprehensive electronic search was conducted in Cochrane, PubMed/MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar using the terms “Gingivectomy”, “Gingivoplasty”, “Crown lengthening”, “Gingival surgery”, and “LASER” to identify human studies that compared laser-assisted gingivectomy with traditional surgical methods up until December 2022. The inclusion criteria were as follows: English language, use of laser as the primary treatment tool, and study designs including randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials, clinical trials, and comparative studies. Results: Twenty-two studies met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Diode lasers (810–940 nm) and Erbium, chromium-doped yttrium scandium gallium garnet laser (Er,Cr:YSGG) lasers caused less postoperative pain than conventional flap surgery, while the neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd:YAG) laser resulted in higher initial pain. The diode 808 nm laser yielded mixed results—one study reported pain levels comparable to those of scalpels, while another noted reduced pain with laser use. However, one study indicated greater use of analgesics in laser-treated patients, suggesting increased discomfort. Lasers, particularly carbon dioxide (CO2) and diode 810 nm lasers, provided superior hemostasis compared to scalpels, with the Er,Cr:YSGG laser in flapless osteotomy minimizing bleeding. Additionally, no sutures were required in the laser-treated groups. The stability of the gingival margins after laser treatment was found to be similar to that of the scalpel. Discussion: All lasers discussed in this article can be safely and effectively used for gingivectomy as an alternative to conventional surgical methods. Laser treatment demonstrated superior clinical outcomes in terms of pain, patient satisfaction, hemostasis, recovery period, and periodontal health.https://www.explorationpub.com/uploads/Article/A1001325/1001325.pdflasergingivectomygingivoplastyscalpelsurgical methods |
| spellingShingle | Omar Hamadah Saed Almahayni Raghad Ghazzawi Radek Mounajjed Walid Altayeb Marwa Khalil Effectiveness of laser-assisted gingivectomy compared to surgical methods: a systematic review Exploration of Medicine laser gingivectomy gingivoplasty scalpel surgical methods |
| title | Effectiveness of laser-assisted gingivectomy compared to surgical methods: a systematic review |
| title_full | Effectiveness of laser-assisted gingivectomy compared to surgical methods: a systematic review |
| title_fullStr | Effectiveness of laser-assisted gingivectomy compared to surgical methods: a systematic review |
| title_full_unstemmed | Effectiveness of laser-assisted gingivectomy compared to surgical methods: a systematic review |
| title_short | Effectiveness of laser-assisted gingivectomy compared to surgical methods: a systematic review |
| title_sort | effectiveness of laser assisted gingivectomy compared to surgical methods a systematic review |
| topic | laser gingivectomy gingivoplasty scalpel surgical methods |
| url | https://www.explorationpub.com/uploads/Article/A1001325/1001325.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT omarhamadah effectivenessoflaserassistedgingivectomycomparedtosurgicalmethodsasystematicreview AT saedalmahayni effectivenessoflaserassistedgingivectomycomparedtosurgicalmethodsasystematicreview AT raghadghazzawi effectivenessoflaserassistedgingivectomycomparedtosurgicalmethodsasystematicreview AT radekmounajjed effectivenessoflaserassistedgingivectomycomparedtosurgicalmethodsasystematicreview AT walidaltayeb effectivenessoflaserassistedgingivectomycomparedtosurgicalmethodsasystematicreview AT marwakhalil effectivenessoflaserassistedgingivectomycomparedtosurgicalmethodsasystematicreview |