Copyright: ©Author(s) 2026.
World J Exp Med. Mar 20, 2026; 16(1): 117125
Published online Mar 20, 2026. doi: 10.5493/wjem.v16.i1.117125
Published online Mar 20, 2026. doi: 10.5493/wjem.v16.i1.117125
Table 1 Comparison of plaque scores at different time intervals
Table 2 Pairwise comparison of plaque scores within the groups
| aPDT with CNPs-ICG + SRP | Conventional SRP | ||||||||
| Mean | SD | MD | P value | Mean | SD | MD | P value | ||
| Baseline | 2.22 | 0.64 | 1.907 | 0.0011 | Baseline | 2.2 | 0.52 | 1.883 | 0.0011 |
| 1 month | 0.32 | 0.04 | 1 month | 0.32 | 0.04 | ||||
| 1 month | 0.32 | 0.04 | -0.499 | 0.0011 | 1 month | 0.32 | 0.04 | -2.69 | 0.0011 |
| 3 months | 0.82 | 0.4 | 3 months | 0.59 | 0.05 | ||||
| 3 months | 0.82 | 0.4 | -1.408 | 0.0011 | 3 months | 0.59 | 0.05 | -1.614 | 0.0011 |
| Baseline | 2.22 | 0.64 | Baseline | 2.22 | 0.52 | ||||
Table 3 Comparison of modified sulcus bleeding scores at different time intervals
Table 4 Pairwise comparison within the groups
| aPDT with CNPs-ICG + SRP | Conventional SRP | ||||||||
| Mean | SD | MD | P value | Mean | SD | MD | P value | ||
| Baseline | 2.04 | 0.44 | 1.56 | 0.0011 | Baseline | 1.98 | 0.53 | 1.435 | 0.0011 |
| 1 month | 0.48 | 0.36 | 1 month | 0.54 | 0.42 | ||||
| 1 month | 0.48 | 0.36 | -0.632 | 0.0011 | 1 month | 0.54 | 0.42 | -0.607 | 0.0011 |
| 3 months | 1.1 | 0.2 | 3 months | 1.15 | 0.27 | ||||
| 3 months | 1.1 | 0.2 | -0.943 | 0.0011 | 3 months | 1.15 | 0.27 | -0.828 | 0.0011 |
| Baseline | 2.04 | 0.44 | Baseline | 1.98 | 0.53 | ||||
Table 5 Comparison of probing pocket depth at different time intervals
Table 6 Pairwise comparison within the groups
| aPDT with CNPs-ICG + SRP | Conventional SRP | ||||||||
| Mean | SD | MD | P value | Mean | SD | MD | P value | ||
| Baseline | 7 | 1.08 | 3.733 | 0.0011 | Baseline | 6.7 | 1.104 | 3.03 | 0.0011 |
| 1 month | 3.26 | 0.52 | 1 month | 3.73 | 0.63 | ||||
| 1 month | 3.26 | 0.52 | 0.133 | 0.87 | 1 month | 3.73 | 0.63 | -0.033 | 0.99 |
| 3 months | 3.13 | 0.62 | NS | 3 months | 3.76 | 0.77 | |||
| 3 months | 3.13 | 0.62 | -3.86 | 0.0011 | 3 months | 3.76 | 0.77 | -3 | 0.0011 |
| Baseline | 7 | 1.08 | Baseline | 6.7 | 1.104 | ||||
Table 7 Comparison of Mean relative clinical attachment level at different time interval in both groups
Table 8 Pairwise comparison within the groups
| aPDT with CNPs-ICG + SRP | Conventional SRP | ||||||||
| Mean | SD | MD | P value | Mean | SD | MD | P value | ||
| Baseline | 12 | 1.01 | 3.73 | 0.0011 | Baseline | 12.2 | 1.16 | 3.5 | 0.0011 |
| 1 month | 8.26 | 0.52 | 1 month | 8.7 | 0.98 | ||||
| 1 month | 8.26 | 0.52 | -0.133 | 0.31 | 1 month | 8.7 | 0.98 | -0.167 | 0.068 |
| 3 months | 8.4 | 0.62 | NS | 3 months | 8.9 | 0.99 | NS | ||
| 3 months | 8.4 | 0.62 | -3.6 | 0.0011 | 3 months | 8.9 | 0.99 | -3.33 | 0.0011 |
| Baseline | 12 | 1.01 | Baseline | 12.2 | 1.16 | ||||
Table 9 Distribution of BANA scores at different time interval in antimicrobial photodynamic therapy with indocyanine green-doped chitosan nanoparticles group, n (%)
| Negative | Weak positive | Positive | Total | P value | |
| Baseline | 3 (10) | 10 (33.3) | 17 (56.7) | 30 (100) | 0.0011 |
| Right after therapy | 17 (56.7) | 13 (43.3) | 0 | 30 (100) | |
| 1 month | 24 (80) | 6 (20) | 0 | 30 (100) | |
| 3 months | 24 (80) | 6 (20) | 0 | 30 (100) | |
| Total | 68 (56.7) | 35 (29.2) | 17 (14.2) | 120 (100) |
Table 10 Distribution of BANA scores at different time interval in conventional scaling and root planning group, n (%)
| Negative | Weak positive | Positive | Total | P value | |
| Baseline | 2 (6.7) | 11 (36.7) | 17 (56.7) | 30 (100) | 0.07 |
| Right after therapy | 5 (16.7) | 19 (63.3) | 6 (20) | 30 (100) | NS |
| 1 month | 2 (6.7) | 13 (43.3) | 15 (50) | 30 (100) | |
| 3 months | 2 (6.7) | 11 (36.7) | 17 (56.7) | 30 (100) | |
| Total | 11 (9.2) | 54 (45) | 55 (45.8) | 120 (100) |
Table 11 Comparison of Mean plaque scores between the groups at different time intervals
| Plaque index | Number | Mean | SD | t | P value | |
| Baseline | aPDT with CNPs-ICG + SRP | 30 | 2.22 | 0.64 | 0.159 | 0.84 |
| Conventional SRP | 30 | 2.2 | 0.52 | NS | ||
| 1 month | aPDT with CNPs-ICG + SRP | 30 | 0.32 | 0.04 | 0 | 0.99 |
| Conventional SRP | 30 | 0.32 | 0.04 | NS | ||
| 3 months | aPDT with CNPs-ICG + SRP | 30 | 0.82 | 0.4 | 3.07 | 0.0051 |
| Conventional SRP | 30 | 0.59 | 0.05 |
Table 12 Comparison of mean modified sulcus bleeding scores between the groups at different time intervals
| Modified sulcus bleeding index | Number | Mean | SD | t | P value | |
| Baseline | aPDT with CNPs-ICG + SRP | 30 | 2.04 | 0.44 | 0.52 | 0.6 |
| Conventional SRP | 30 | 1.98 | 0.53 | NS | ||
| 1 month | aPDT with CNPs-ICG + SRP | 30 | 0.48 | 0.36 | -0.63 | 0.52 |
| Conventional SRP | 30 | 0.54 | 0.42 | NS | ||
| 3 months | aPDT with CNPs-ICG + SRP | 30 | 1.104 | 0.2 | -0.787 | 0.43 |
| Conventional SRP | 30 | 1.15 | 0.27 | NS | ||
Table 13 Comparison of mean probing pocket depth between the groups at different time intervals
Table 14 Comparison of Mean relative clinical attachment level between the groups at different time intervals
Table 15 Comparison of BANA test scores at baseline between the groups, n (%)
| Baseline | aPDT with CNPs-ICG + SRP | Conventional SRP | Total | P value |
| Negative | 3 (10) | 2 (6.7) | 5 (8.3) | 0.88 |
| Weak positive | 10 (33.3) | 11 (36.7) | 21 (35) | NS |
| Positive | 17 (56.7) | 17 (56.7) | 34 (56.7) | |
| Total | 30 (100) | 30 (100) | 60 (100) |
Table 16 Comparison of BANA test scores at right after therapy between the groups, n (%)
| Right after therapy | aPDT with CNPs-ICG + SRP | Conventional SRP | Total | P value |
| Negative | 17 (56.7) | 5 (16.7) | 22 (36.7) | 0.0011 |
| Weak positive | 13 (43.3) | 19 (63.3) | 32 (53.3) | |
| Positive | 0 | 6 (20) | 6 (10) | |
| Total | 30 (100) | 30 (100) | 60 (100) |
Table 17 Comparison of BANA test scores after 1 month between the groups, n (%)
| After 1 month | aPDT with CNPs-ICG + SRP | Conventional SRP | Total | P value |
| Negative | 24 (80) | 2 (6.7) | 26 (43.3) | 0.0011 |
| Weak positive | 6 (20) | 13 (43.3) | 19 (31.7) | |
| Positive | 0 | 15 (50) | 15 (25) | |
| Total | 30 (100) | 30 (100) | 60 (100) |
Table 18 Comparison of BANA test scores after 3 months between the groups, n (%)
| After 3 month | aPDT with CNPs-ICG + SRP | Conventional SRP | Total | P value |
| Negative | 24 (80) | 2 (6.7) | 26 (43.3) | 0.0011 |
| Weak positive | 6 (20) | 11 (36.7) | 17 (28.3) | |
| Positive | 0 | 17 (56.7) | 17 (28.3) | |
| Total | 30 (100) | 30 (100) | 60 (100) |
- Citation: Raj SC, Sen S, Baral D, Mohanty D, Tabassum S, Sil S, Sahu M. Indocyanine green doped with chitosan nanoparticles based antimicrobial photodynamic therapy in periodontitis patients: A randomized clinical trial. World J Exp Med 2026; 16(1): 117125
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2220-315x/full/v16/i1/117125.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5493/wjem.v16.i1.117125
