An interventional study of Irradiation of implants with 635nm laser in Malocclusion, Angle Class II, sponsored by Wroclaw Medical University. Completed at 1 site in Poland. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2019-11-25.
Sponsored by Wroclaw Medical University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
The study aimed to clinically estimate an influence of a 635nm diode laser on the primary and secondary stability of orthodontic mini-implants placed in a maxilla, to assess mini-implants failure rate (mini-implant loss) and to evaluate a pain level after the treatment. The randomized clinical split-mouth trial included 15 subjects, 30 implants (Dual Top Anchor System, Seoul, Korea) with a diameter 1.4mm and length of 10mm. Mini-implants were placed in the area of the attached gingiva between the second premolar and first molar teeth 2 mm below the mucogingival junction of both sides of the maxilla in 20 patients (13 women and 7 men; age: 32.5 ± 6.1 years).
455 studies on the registry are indexed under Malocclusion; 89 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 20 is below the median of 36 across 371 interventional studies indexed under Malocclusion.
Browse Malocclusion studies →Wroclaw Medical University is the lead sponsor of 93 studies on the registry; 28 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Exclusion Criteria:
The 635-nm laser parameters; dose: 10J per point (20J/cm2), time: 100 sec per point, 2 points (irradiation on a buccal, and a palatal side of the alveolus/implant), the total energy per session 20J.
Procedure: Irradiation of implants with 635nm laser
Irradiation of implants with 635nm laser with a dose of 10J
stability of orthodontic mini-implants
The mini-implants stability was estimated employing a Periotest device (Medzintechnik Gulden e K, Modautal, Germany). The Periotest measurement system includes the sound formed from contact between an object and a metallic tapping bar in a handpiece, which is electromagnetically driven and electronically verified. The Periotest response detection is analyzed through a fast Fourier transform (FFT) algorithm. Simply put, the Periotest answer to tapping is estimated by an accelerometer and then analyzed. The signal generated by tapping is then transformed to a value called the Periotest value (PTV), which depends on the damping characteristics of the peri-implant tissue. \[27\] The Periotest Test values (PTVs) are based on a numerical scale ranging from -8 to +50, defined by mathematical computation. The lower Periotest values indicate higher implant stability and thereupon the higher absorption effect of the target objects.
Time frame: 60 days
Pain level
Immediately after the mini-implants placement, each patient received a questionnaire for individual pain assessment (the numeric rating scale, NRS-11, grade level 0-10). The maximum pain level was measured at both sides of the maxilla during the first day after the treatment. The NRS-11 scale consists of a conscious, subjective assessment of the pain experienced; therefore, it is used in the case of patients over ten years old. A rating of 0 signifies no pain, 1-3 represents mild pain, 4-6 moderate pain, and 7-10 severe pain.
Time frame: 24 hours
mini-implants loss
Time frame: 60 days
Plan to share: No
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
This study is completed, as verified in Nov 2019. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Wroclaw Medical University