Our aim was to determine whether low level laser therapy (LLLT) can decrease the time between extraction/socket graft and implant placement, by evaluating histological changes in sockets grafted with a particulate allograft material and treated with LLLT. Thirty patients had a socket grafted with a particulate allograft material (MinerOss) covered with a resorbable collagen wound dressing. The patients were then randomly divided into two equal groups (n = 15): test group receiving postoperative LLLT treatment, and control group without postoperative laser treatment. The assessment of bone formation was carried out in both groups at well-determined time intervals after surgery by histostomorphometric analysis. The histological results of the site treated with LLLT for 21 days, harvested at 60 days after grafting showed abundant new bone formation without any sign of inflammation. The same results were obtained in the control group not before 120 days post-surgery. It can be concluded that LLLT photobiomodulation can reduce the healing time after grafting the extraction socket. Histological evidence suggests that new bone formation in the sockets appeared within 60 days after LLLT treatment compared to a minimum of 120 days in the control group.

Objective: Regeneration is defined as a reconstruction of a lost part of the body in such a way that the structure and function of the lost tissue are completely restored. The aim of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes of intrabony defects treatment using regenerative periodontal therapy with enamel matrix proteins (Emdogain, EMD) with a control group. Methods: Ten patients with chronic periodontitis were included in this randomized, controlled clinical study. Two groups received conservative periodontal therapy. In the test group, different teeth received regenerative treatment with EMD. In the control group teeth received solely conservative periodontal therapy. Pocket depth probing (PD) and bone reduction (based on X rays) were registered at baseline and after eight months in both groups. In the control group Results: Both groups showed a significant reduction of PD. The teeth treated with EMD showed a significant attachment gain. Within the test group, the radiographic examination of the teeth treated with EMD showed no significant change, whereas the teeth in the control group showed significant bone reduction. Conclusions: Intrabony defects in teeth treaded with EMD exhibit a substantially higher gain in clinical attachment and defect filling. The use of EMD in dental practice can prevent further bone loss.