SynthesisBMC oral health2025
Laser doppler flowmetry as a diagnostic tool to detect gingival inflammation: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A dual-loop chemostat to investigate multi-species biofilms on implant surfaces under adjustable flow conditions.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Quantitative analysis of gingival vascular morphology using optical coherence tomography angiography in induced gingivitis.Biomedical optics express · 2025Article
- Implementation, Validation and Clinical Testing of Oximetry Device for Microcirculation Assessment in Oral Tissue.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this systematic review was to evaluate whether laser Doppler flowmetry (LDF) as a diagnostic tool is effective in detecting gingival inflammation.
methodsThis review was conducted and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (registration number CRD42025633576). Two authors independently performed searches in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Scopus.
resultsIn total, 1317 studies were identified, of which 10 met the inclusion criteria after full-text screening. All studies compared perfusion with a healthy control group, seven included a gingivitis group, five included patients with periodontitis, and none included patients with peri-implant disease. Higher blood flow values were found in patients with chronic gingivitis compared to healthy controls, while patients with experimental gingivitis showed no significant difference. Blood flow values in patients with periodontitis showed controversial results.
conclusionsLDF shows potential utility in detecting chronic gingival inflammation and altered perfusion patterns between healthy individuals and those with gingival or periodontal inflammation. However, reliably grading perfusion across disease stages and distinguishing between acute gingivitis and chronic periodontitis remains challenging. Notably, there is a lack of data regarding the use of LDF in peri-implant tissues, representing a significant gap in current research. At present, established clinical parameters such as probing depth and bleeding on probing (BOP), remain the gold standard in routine periodontal diagnostics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.