Non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis using an air-abrasive device or mechanical debridement and local application of chlorhexidine: a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical study.

Department of Oral Surgery, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Journal Of Clinical Periodontology (Impact Factor: 3.61). 09/2011; 38(9):872-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2011.01762.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The aim of this prospective, parallel group designed, randomized controlled clinical study was to evaluate the effectiveness of an air-abrasive device (AAD) for non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis.
Thirty patients, each of whom displayed at least one implant with initial to moderate peri-implantitis, were enrolled in an oral hygiene program (OHI) and randomly instrumented using either (1) AAD (amino acid glycine powder) or (2) mechanical debridement using carbon curets and antiseptic therapy with chlorhexidine digluconate (MDA). Clinical parameters were measured at baseline, 3 and 6 months after treatment [e.g. bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL)].
At 6 months, AAD group revealed significantly higher (p<0.05; unpaired t-test) changes in mean BOP scores when compared with MDA-treated sites (43.5 ± 27.7%versus 11.0 ± 15.7%). Both groups exhibited comparable PD reductions (AAD: 0.6 ± 0.6 mm versus MDA: 0.5 ± 0.6 mm) and CAL gains (AAD: 0.4 ± 0.7 mm versus MDA: 0.5 ± 0.8 mm) (p>0.05; unpaired t-test, respectively).
Within its limitations, the present study has indicated that (i) both treatment procedures resulted in comparable but limited CAL gains at 6 months, and (ii) OHI+AAD was associated with significantly higher BOP reductions than OHI+MDA.

1 Follower
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives The aim of this study was to make a comparative evaluation of professional oral hygiene with or without the adjunct of glycine air-powder system for the treatment of peri-implant mucositis.Methods After the application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, patients were divided in two groups: in control group, patients were treated with professional oral hygiene manoeuvres (POH) while in the test group, glycine air-powder system (SGA) was adjuncted to professional oral hygiene. Probing depth (PD), bleeding index (BI) and plaque index (PI) were measured at baseline, and 3 and 6 months after the treatment.ResultsA total of 30 patients (15 per group) were selected for the study. In POH e SGA group, PD was, 2.86 ± 0.37 and 3.00 ± 0.36 mm at baseline, 2.90 ± 0.53 and 2.62 ± 0.50 mm after 3 months, 2.96 ± 0.56 and 2.41 ± 0.54 mm after 6 months, respectively, significantly lower in SGA group in the last follow-up visit. In both groups, both PI and BI decreased over time.Conclusions The present reports showed that both techniques were useful for the treatment of peri-implant mucositis. In the test group (with glycine powder), a significant reduction of probing depth was observed.
    International Journal of Dental Hygiene 11/2014; DOI:10.1111/idh.12114 · 0.68 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Peri-implant inflammations represent serious diseases after dental implant treatment, which affect both the surrounding hard and soft tissue. Due to prevalence rates up to 56%, peri-implantitis can lead to the loss of the implant without multilateral prevention and therapy concepts. Specific continuous check-ups with evaluation and elimination of risk factors (e.g. smoking, systemic diseases and periodontitis) are effective precautions. In addition to aspects of osseointegration, type and structure of the implant surface are of importance. For the treatment of peri-implant disease various conservative and surgical approaches are available. Mucositis and moderate forms of peri-implantitis can obviously be treated effectively using conservative methods. These include the utilization of different manual ablations, laser-supported systems as well as photodynamic therapy, which may be extended by local or systemic antibiotics. It is possible to regain osseointegration. In cases with advanced peri-implantitis surgical therapies are more effective than conservative approaches. Depending on the configuration of the defects, resective surgery can be carried out for elimination of peri-implant lesions, whereas regenerative therapies may be applicable for defect filling. The cumulative interceptive supportive therapy (CIST) protocol serves as guidance for the treatment of the peri-implantitis. The aim of this review is to provide an overview about current data and to give advices regarding diagnosis, prevention and treatment of peri-implant disease for practitioners.
    Head & Face Medicine 09/2014; 10(1):34. DOI:10.1186/1746-160X-10-34 · 0.87 Impact Factor
  • Source