Year: 2026 | Month: January | Volume: 16 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 162-172
DOI: https://doi.org/10.52403/ijhsr.20260120
Immediate and Early Esthetic Outcomes of Gingival Depigmentation Using 980nm Diode vs. 2940 nm Er:YAG Lasers
Anuj Bhattacharya, Sayan Roy
Research Scholar, School of Dental Sciences, Nirwan University, Jaipur, India.
Senior Consultant, Lake Dental Care, Kolkata
Corresponding Author: Anuj Bhattacharya
ABSTRACT
Background: Gingival hyperpigmentation presents an esthetic challenge, particularly in patients with high smile lines. Conventional depigmentation methods such as scalpel excision and abrasion are effective but often associated with bleeding, pain, and delayed healing. Laser-assisted depigmentation has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative. Among available modalities, diode (980 nm) and Er:YAG (2940 nm) lasers are widely used, but limited evidence exists comparing their immediate and early esthetic outcomes.
Aim: To compare the immediate and early esthetic outcomes, healing response, and patient-reported experiences following gingival depigmentation with 980 nm diode and 2940 nm Er:YAG lasers.
Methodology: A randomized split-mouth clinical trial was conducted in 30 systemically healthy patients with bilateral maxillary anterior gingival pigmentation. Each patient received depigmentation with a diode laser on one side and an Er:YAG laser on the contralateral side, allocated by computer-generated randomization. Outcomes included esthetic improvement measured using the Dummett–Gupta Oral Pigmentation Index (DOPI) and Hedin Melanin Index, wound healing assessed by the Landry Healing Index, and patient-reported pain and satisfaction scores using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Assessments were performed at baseline, immediately postoperatively, 1 week, and 1 month. Data were analyzed using paired t-tests and repeated measures ANOVA, with p<0.05 considered significant.
Results: Both diode and Er:YAG lasers achieved significant immediate depigmentation, with complete pigment removal observed in 86.7% of diode-treated sites and 93.3% of Er:YAG-treated sites (ns). At 1 month, mean DOPI scores were lower in the Er:YAG group (0.2 ± 0.3) compared to the diode group (0.5 ± 0.5), reaching statistical significance (p=0.04). Healing was superior in the Er:YAG group at 1 week (Landry Index 4.1 ± 0.4 vs. 3.6 ± 0.5, p=0.03). Pain perception was lower with Er:YAG (VAS 2.1 ± 0.9) than diode (VAS 3.2 ± 1.1, p=0.02), while patient satisfaction scores were higher (9.2 ± 0.6 vs. 8.5 ± 0.8, p=0.01). No adverse effects or significant recurrence were noted during the follow-up.
Conclusion: Both diode and Er:YAG lasers are effective for gingival depigmentation. The Er:YAG laser demonstrated superior early esthetic stability, better healing, reduced postoperative pain, and greater patient satisfaction. Diode lasers, however, remain a reliable option with efficient outcomes. Selection of modality should be based on operator expertise, patient comfort, and esthetic expectations.
Key words: Gingival pigmentation; Esthetics, Dental; Lasers, Diode; Lasers, Er:YAG; Periodontal therapy; Wound healing; Patient satisfaction.