Background: Numerous strategies have been proposed to decrease orthodontic treatment time.\nPhotobiomodulation (PBM) has previously been demonstrated to assist in this objective. The aim of this study was\nto test if intraoral PBM increases the rate of tooth alignment and reduces the time required to resolve anterior\ndental crowding.\nMethods: Nineteen orthodontic subjects with Class I or Class II malocclusion and Littleââ?¬â?¢s Irregularity Index (LII) ââ?°Â¥\n3 mm were selected from a pool of applicants, providing 28 total arches. No cases required extraction. The test\ngroup (N = 11, 18 arches, 10 upper, 8 lower) received daily PBM treatment with an intraoral LED device (OrthoPulseââ??¢,\nBiolux Research Ltd.) during orthodontic treatment, while the control group (N = 8, 10 arches, 3 upper, 7 lower)\nreceived only orthodontic treatment. The PBM device exposed the buccal side of the gums to near-infrared light with\na continuous 850-nm wavelength, generating an average daily energy density of 9.5 J/cm2. LII was measured at the\nstart (T0) of orthodontic treatment until alignment was reached (T1, where LII ââ?°Â¤ 1 mm). The control group was mostly\nbonded with 0.018-in slot self-ligating SPEED brackets (Hespeler Orthodontics, Cambridge, ON. Canada), while\nconventionally-ligating Ormco Mini-Diamond twins were used on the PBM group (Ormco, Glendora, Calif. USA). Both\ngroups progressed through alignment with NiTi arch-wires from 0.014-in through to 0.018-in (Ormco), with identical\narch-wire changes. The rate of anterior alignment, in LII mm/week, and total treatment time was collected for both\ngroups. Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare groups and while considering age, sex, ethnicity, arch\nand degree of crowding.\nResults: The mean alignment rate for the PBM group was significantly higher than that of the control group, with an\nLII change rate of 1.27 mm/week (SD 0.53, 95 % CI Ã?± 0.26) versus 0.44 mm/week (SD 0.20, 95 % CI Ã?± 0.12), respectively\n(p = 0.0002). The treatment time to alignment was significantly smaller for the PBM group, which achieved alignment\nin 48 days (SD 39, 95 % CI Ã?± 39), while the control group took 104 days (SD 55, 95 % CI Ã?±19, p = 0.0053) on average.\nThese results demonstrated that intraoral PBM increased the average rate of tooth movement by 2.9-fold, resulting in a\n54 % average decrease in alignment duration versus control. The average PBM compliance to daily treatments was\n93 % during alignment.\nConclusions: Under the limitations of this study, the findings suggest that intraoral PBM could be used to decrease\nanterior alignment treatment time, which could consequently decrease full orthodontic treatment time. However, due\nto its limitations, further research in the form of a large, randomized trial is needed.
Loading....