One-year outcomes of repeated adjunctive photodynamic therapy during periodontal maintenance: a proof-of-principle randomized-controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND: Single photodynamic therapy (PDT) has been effective in initial periodontal therapy, but only improved bleeding on probing (BoP) in maintenance patients after a single use. Repeated PDT has not been addressed. OBJECTIVES: To study the possible added benefits of repeated adjunctive PDT to conventional treatment of residual pockets in patients enrolled in periodontal maintenance. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Ten maintenance patients with 70 residual pockets [probing pocket depth (PPD)>or=5 mm] were randomly assigned for treatment five times in 2 weeks (Days 0, 1, 2, 7, 14) with PDT (test) or non-activated laser (control) following debridement. The primary outcome variable was PPD, and the secondary variables were clinical attachment level (CAL) and BoP. These were assessed at 3, 6 and 12 months following the interventions. RESULTS: Greater PPD reductions were observed in the test (-0.67 +/- 0.34; p=0.01) compared with the control patients (-0.04 +/- 0.33; NS) after 6 months. Significant CAL gain (+0.52 +/- 0.31; p=0.01) was noted for the test, but not in the control (-0.27 +/- 0.52; NS) patients after 6 months. BoP percentages decreased significantly in test (97-64%, 67%, 77%), but not control patients after 3, 6 and 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Repeated (five times) PDT adjunctive to debridement yielded improved clinical outcomes in residual pockets in maintenance patients. The effects were best documented after 6 months.

Nonsurgical treatment of aggressive periodontitis with photodynamic therapy or systemic antibiotics. Three-month results of a randomized, prospective, controlled clinical study

The aim of this randomized, controlled clinical study was to compare the short-term effects of nonsurgical periodontal therapy with the additional administration of systemic antibiotics (AB) and the same therapy with additional photodynamic therapy (PDT) in the treatment of patients with aggressive periodontitis (AP). Thirty-six patients with AP received full-mouth nonsurgical periodontal treatment (SRP) and were then randomly divided into two groups of 18 subjects each. Group AB received amoxicillin and metronidazole three times a day for 7 days. Group PDT received two applications of PDT on the day of SRP as well as at follow-up after 7 days. The following clinical parameters were measured at baseline and 3 months after therapy: plaque index (PLI), bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), gingival recession (GR), and clinical attachment level (CAL). After 3 months, PD was significantly reduced in both groups (from 5.0±0.8 mm to 3.2±0.4 mm with AB, and 5.1±0.5 mm to 4.0±0.8 mm with PDT; both p<0.001), while AB revealed significantly lower values compared to PDT (p = 0.001). In both groups, GR was not significantly changed. CAL was significantly reduced in both groups (PDT: 5.7±0.8 mm to 4.7±1.1 mm; p=0.011; AB: 5.5±1.1 mm to 3.9±1.0 mm; p<0.001) and differed significantly between the groups (p=0.025). The number of residual pockets (PD ≥4 mm) and positive BOP was reduced by AB from 961 to 377, and by PDT from 628 to 394. Pockets with PD ≥7 mm were reduced by AB from 141 to 7, and by PDT from 137 to 61. After 3 months, both treatments led to statistically significant clinical improvements. The systemic administration of antibiotics, however, resulted in significantly higher reduction of PD and a lower number of deep pockets compared to PDT.

Nonsurgical antimicrobial photodynamic therapy in moderate vs severe peri-implant defects: a clinical pilot study

OBJECTIVE Recent review articles have shown that open debridement is more effective in the treatment of peri-implantitis than closed therapy. However, surgery may result in marginal recession and compromise esthetics. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of nonsurgical antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) in moderate vs severe defects. METHOD AND MATERIALS The study encompassed 16 patients with a total of 18 ailing implants. Ten of these implants showed moderate bone loss (< 5 mm; Group 1) and eight implants severe defects (5 through 8 mm; Group 2). All implants received aPDT without surgical intervention. At baseline and 2 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months after therapy, peri-implant health was assessed including sulcus bleeding index (SBI), probing depth (PD), distance from implant shoulder to marginal mucosa (DIM), and clinical attachment level (CAL). Radiographic evaluation of distance from implant to bone (DIB) allowed comparison of peri-implant hard tissues after 6 months. RESULTS Baseline values for SBI were comparable in both groups. Three months after therapy, in both groups, SBI and CAL decreased significantly. In contrast, after 6 months, CAL and DIB increased significantly in Group 2, not in Group 1. However, DIM-values were not statistically different 6 months after therapy in both groups. CONCLUSION Within the limits of this 6-month study, nonsurgical aPDT could stop bone resorption in moderate peri-implant defects but not in severe defects. However, marginal tissue recession was not significantly different in both groups at the end of the study. Therefore, especially in esthetically important sites, surgical treatment of severe peri-implantitis defects seems to remain mandatory.

Anti-infective therapy of peri-implantitis with adjunctive local drug delivery or photodynamic therapy: 12-month outcomes of a randomized controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study is to compare the clinical, microbiological and host-derived effects in the non-surgical treatment of initial peri-implantitis with either adjunctive local drug delivery (LDD) or adjunctive photodynamic therapy (PDT) after 12 months. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty subjects with initial peri-implantitis, that is, pocket probing depths (PPD) 4-6 mm with bleeding on probing (BoP) and radiographic bone loss ≤2 mm, were randomly assigned to two treatment groups. All implants were mechanically debrided with titanium curettes and with a glycine-based powder airpolishing system. Implants in the test group (N = 20) received adjunctive PDT, whereas minocycline microspheres were locally delivered into the peri-implant pockets of control implants (N = 20). At sites with residual BoP, treatment was repeated after 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. The primary outcome variable was the change in the number of peri-implant sites with BoP. Secondary outcome variables included changes in PPD, clinical attachment level (CAL), mucosal recession (REC) and in bacterial counts and crevicular fluid (CF) levels of host-derived biomarkers. RESULTS: After 12 months, the number of BoP-positive sites decreased statistically significantly (P < 0.05) from baseline in both groups (PDT: 4.03 ± 1.66-1.74 ± 1.37, LDD: 4.41 ± 1.47-1.55 ± 1.26). A statistically significant (P < 0.05) decrease in PPD from baseline was observed at PDT-treated sites up to 9 months (4.19 ± 0.55 mm to 3.89 ± 0.68 mm) and up to 12 months at LDD-treated sites (4.39 ± 0.77 mm to 3.83 ± 0.85 mm). Counts of Porphyromonas gingivalis and Tannerella forsythia decreased statistically significantly (P < 0.05) from baseline to 6 months in the PDT and to 12 months in the LDD group, respectively. CF levels of IL-1β decreased statistically significantly (P < 0.05) from baseline to 12 months in both groups. No statistically significant differences (P > 0.05) were observed between groups after 12 months with respect to clinical, microbiological and host-derived parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Non-surgical mechanical debridement with adjunctive PDT was equally effective in the reduction of mucosal inflammation as with adjunctive delivery of minocycline microspheres up to 12 months. Adjunctive PDT may represent an alternative approach to LDD in the non-surgical treatment of initial peri-implantitis.

Six-month results following treatment of aggressive periodontitis with antimicrobial photodynamic therapy or amoxicillin and metronidazole.

OBJECTIVE The use of antibacterial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) additionally to scaling and root planing (SRP) has been shown to positively influence the clinical outcomes. However, at present, it is unknown to what extent aPDT may represent a potential alternative to the use of systemic antibiotics in nonsurgical periodontal therapy in patients with aggressive periodontitis (AP). The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes following nonsurgical periodontal therapy and additional use of either aPDT or amoxicillin and metronidazole (AB) in patients with AP. MATERIAL AND METHODS Thirty-six patients with AP displaying at least three sites with pocket depth (PD) ≥6 mm were treated with SRP and either systemic administration of AB for 7 days or with two episodes of aPDT. The following clinical parameters were evaluated at baseline and at 6 months: plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BOP), PD, gingival recession (GR) and clinical attachment level (CAL). RESULTS Thirty-five patients have completed the 6-month evaluation. At 6 months, mean PD was statistically significantly reduced in both groups (from 5.0 ± 0.8 to 3.0 ± 0.6 mm with AB and from 5.1 ± 0.5 to 3.9 ± 0.8 mm with aPDT (p < 0.001)). AB yielded statistically significantly higher improvements in the primary outcome parameter PD (p < 0.001) when compared to aPDT. The number of pockets ≥7 mm was reduced from 141 to 3 after AB (p < 0.001) and from 137 to 45 after aPDT (p = 0.03). Both therapies resulted in statistically significant reductions in all parameters compared to baseline. CONCLUSION While both treatments resulted in statistically significant clinical improvements, AB showed statistically significantly higher PD reduction and lower number of pockets ≥7 mm compared to aPDT. CLINICAL RELEVANCE In patients with AP, the two times application of aPDT in conjunction with nonsurgical periodontal therapy cannot be considered an alternative to the systemic use of amoxicillin and metronidazole.

Is Photodynamic Therapy an Effective Treatment for Periodontal and Peri-Implant Infections?

Antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (PDT) has attracted much attention for the treatment of pathogenic biofilm associated with peridontitis and peri-implantitis. However, data from randomized controlled clinical studies (RCTs) are limited and, to some extent, controversial, making it difficult to provide appropriate recommendations. Therefore, the aims of the present study were (a) to provide an overview on the current evidence from RCTs evaluating the potential clinical benefit for the additional use of PDT to subgingival mechanical debridement (ie, scaling and root planing) alone in nonsurgical periodontal therapy; and (b) to provide clinical recommendations for the use of PDT in periodontal practice.

Effect of nonsurgical periodontal treatment in conjunction with either systemic administration of amoxicillin and metronidazole or additional photodynamic therapy on the concentration of matrix metalloproteinases 8 and 9 in gingival crevicular fluid in patients with aggressive periodontitis.

BACKGROUND To evaluate in patients with aggressive periodontitis (AgP) the effect of nonsurgical periodontal treatment in conjunction with either additional administration of systemic antibiotics (AB) or application of photodynamic therapy (PDT) on the gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) concentration of matrix metalloproteinases 8 and 9 (MMP-8 and -9). METHODS Thirty-six patients with AgP were included in the study. Patients were randomly assigned to treatment with either scaling and root planing (SRP) followed by systemic administration of AB (e.g. Amoxicillin + Metronidazole) or SRP + PDT. The analysis of MMP-8 and -9 GCF concentrations was performed at baseline and at 3 and 6 months after treatment. Nonparametric U-Mann-Whitney test was used for comparison between groups. Changes from baseline to 3 and 6 months were analyzed with the Friedman's ANOVA test with Kendall's index of consistency. RESULTS In the AB group, patients showed a statistically significant (p = 0.01) decrease of MMP-8 GCF level at both 3 and 6 months post treatment. In the PDT group, the change of MMP-8 GCF level was not statistically significant. Both groups showed at 3 and 6 months a decrease in MMP-9 levels. However, this change did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS Within the limits of the present study, it may be suggested that in patients with AgP, nonsurgical periodontal therapy in conjunction with adjunctive systemic administration of amoxicilin and metronidazole is more effective in reducing GCF MMP-8 levels compared to the adjunctive use of PDT.

European Dermatology Forum Guidelines on topical photodynamic therapy

Topical photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a widely approved therapy for actinic keratoses, squamous cell carcinoma in-situ, superficial and certain thin basal cell carcinomas. Recurrence rates are typically equivalent to existing therapies, although inferior to surgery for nodular basal cell carcinoma. PDT can be used both as a lesional or as a field therapy and has the potential to delay/reduce the development of new lesions. PDT has also been studied for its place in the treatment of, as well as its potential to prevent, superficial skin cancers in immune-suppressed patients, although sustained clearance rates are lower than for immunocompetent individuals. Many additional indications have been evaluated, including photo-rejuvenation and inflammatory and infective dermatoses. This S2 guideline considers all current and emerging indications for the use of topical photodynamic therapy in Dermatology, prepared by the PDT subgroup of the European Dermatology Forum guidelines committee. It presents consensual expert recommendations reflecting current published evidence. An unabridged version of this guideline is available online at: http://www.euroderm.org/edf/index.php/edf-guidelines.

Practical approach to the use of daylight photodynamic therapy with topical methyl aminolevulinate for actinic keratosis: a European consensus

INTRODUCTION Daylight-mediated photodynamic therapy has been shown to be an effective therapy for actinic keratoses (AKs) and a simple and tolerable treatment procedure in three randomized Scandinavian studies and two recent Phase III randomized controlled studies in Australia and Europe. OBJECTIVES To establish consensus recommendations for the use of daylight photodynamic therapy (DL-PDT) using topical methyl aminolaevulinate (MAL) in European patients with AKs. METHODS The DL-PDT consensus recommendations were developed on behalf of the European Society for Photodynamic Therapy in Dermatology and comprised of 10 dermatologists from different European countries with experience in how to treat AK patients with PDT. Consensus was developed based on literature review and experience of the experts in the treatment of AK using DL-PDT. RESULTS The recommendations arising from this panel of experts provide general guidance on the use of DL-PDT as a dermatological procedure with specific guidance regarding patient selection, therapeutic indications, when to treat, pre-treatment skin preparation, MAL application and daylight exposure for patients with AK in different countries of Europe. CONCLUSIONS This consensus recommendation provides a framework for physicians to perform DL-PDT with MAL cream while ensuring efficiency and safety in the treatment of patients with AK in different European countries.

Photodynamic drug delivery enhancement in tumours does not depend on leukocyte-endothelial interaction in a human mesothelioma xenograft model

The pre-treatment of tumour neovessels by low-level photodynamic therapy (PDT) improves the distribution of concomitantly administered systemic chemotherapy. The mechanism by which PDT permeabilizes the tumour vessel wall is only partially known. We have recently shown that leukocyte-endothelial cell interaction is essential for photodynamic drug delivery to normal tissue. The present study investigates whether PDT enhances drug delivery in malignant mesothelioma and whether it involves comparable mechanisms of actions.

Current status of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy in Europe

Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is an important modulator of angiogenesis, and has been implicated in the pathology of a number of conditions, including age-related macular degeneration (AMD), diabetic retinopathy, and cancer. AMD is a progressive disease of the macula and the third major cause of blindness worldwide. If not treated appropriately, AMD can progress rapidly, causing legal blindness within months of the second eye becoming affected. Until recently, the treatment options for AMD have been limited, with photodynamic therapy (PDT) the mainstay treatment. Although PDT is effective at slowing disease progression, it rarely results in improved vision. Pegaptanib and ranibizumab are both anti-VEGF therapies licensed for the treatment of neovascular AMD in Europe; however, these drugs are not yet available in Japan. This article reviews the available clinical data on anti-VEGF therapies for the treatment of neovascular AMD in Europe, and considers the future of this exciting therapy.

Verteporfin plus Ranibizumab for Choroidal Neovascularization in Age-related Macular Degeneration: Twelve-month MONT BLANC Study Results

To compare the efficacy and safety of same-day verteporfin photodynamic therapy (PDT) and intravitreal ranibizumab combination treatment versus ranibizumab monotherapy in neovascular age-related macular degeneration.

Interactions between selected photosensitizers and model membranes: an NMR classification

Membrane interactions of porphyrinic photosensitizers (PSs) are known to play a crucial role for PS efficiency in photodynamic therapy (PDT). In the current paper, the interactions between 15 different porphyrinic PSs with various hydrophilic/lipophilic properties and phospholipid bilayers were probed by NMR spectroscopy. Unilamellar vesicles consisting of dioleoyl-phosphatidyl-choline (DOPC) were used as membrane models. PS-membrane interactions were deduced from analysis of the main DOPC (1)H-NMR resonances (choline and lipid chain signals). Initial membrane adsorption of the PSs was indicated by induced changes to the DOPC choline signal, i.e. a split into inner and outer choline peaks. Based on this parameter, the PSs could be classified into two groups, Type-A PSs causing a split and the Type-B PSs causing no split. A further classification into two subgroups each, A1, A2 and B1, B2 was based on the observed time-dependent changes of the main DOPC NMR signals following initial PS adsorption. Four different time-correlated patterns were found indicating different levels and rates of PS penetration into the hydrophobic membrane interior. The type of interaction was mainly affected by the amphiphilicity and the overall lipophilicity of the applied PS structures. In conclusion, the NMR data provided valuable structural and dynamic insights into the PS-membrane interactions which allow deriving the structural constraints for high membrane affinity and high membrane penetration of a given PS. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Ranibizumab versus verteporfin for neovascular age-related macular degeneration

BACKGROUND: We compared ranibizumab--a recombinant, humanized, monoclonal antibody Fab that neutralizes all active forms of vascular endothelial growth factor A--with photodynamic therapy with verteporfin in the treatment of predominantly classic neovascular age-related macular degeneration. METHODS: During the first year of this 2-year, multicenter, double-blind study, we randomly assigned patients in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive monthly intravitreal injections of ranibizumab (0.3 mg or 0.5 mg) plus sham verteporfin therapy or monthly sham injections plus active verteporfin therapy. The primary end point was the proportion of patients losing fewer than 15 letters from baseline visual acuity at 12 months. RESULTS: Of the 423 patients enrolled, 94.3% of those given 0.3 mg of ranibizumab and 96.4% of those given 0.5 mg lost fewer than 15 letters, as compared with 64.3% of those in the verteporfin group (P<0.001 for each comparison). Visual acuity improved by 15 letters or more in 35.7% of the 0.3-mg group and 40.3% of the 0.5-mg group, as compared with 5.6% of the verteporfin group (P<0.001 for each comparison). Mean visual acuity increased by 8.5 letters in the 0.3-mg group and 11.3 letters in the 0.5-mg group, as compared with a decrease of 9.5 letters in the verteporfin group (P<0.001 for each comparison). Among 140 patients treated with 0.5 mg of ranibizumab, presumed endophthalmitis occurred in 2 patients (1.4%) and serious uveitis in 1 (0.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Ranibizumab was superior to verteporfin as intravitreal treatment of predominantly classic neovascular age-related macular degeneration, with low rates of serious ocular adverse events. Treatment improved visual acuity on average at 1 year. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00061594 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).