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.
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.
- [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; · 0.68 Impact Factor
- Revista Odontológica de Araçatuba. 01/2013; 34(2):14-22.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Peri-implant diseases are defined as inflammatory lesions of the surrounding peri-implant tissues and include peri-implant mucositis (an inflammatory lesion limited to the surrounding mucosa of an implant) and peri-implantitis (an inflammatory lesion of the mucosa that affects the supporting bone with resulting loss of osseointegration). This review aims to describe the different approaches to manage both entities and to provide a critical evaluation of the evidence available on their efficacy. Therapy of peri-implant mucositis and nonsurgical therapy of peri-implantitis usually involve mechanical debridement of the implant surface using curettes, ultrasonic devices, air-abrasive devices or lasers, with or without the adjunctive use of local antibiotics or antiseptics. The efficacy of these therapies has been demonstrated for mucositis: controlled clinical trials show an improvement in clinical parameters, especially in bleeding on probing. For peri-implantitis, the results are limited, especially in terms of probing pocket-depth reduction. Surgical therapy of peri-implantitis is indicated when nonsurgical therapy fails to control the inflammatory changes. Selection of the surgical technique should be based on the characteristics of the peri-implant lesion. In the presence of deep circumferential and intrabony defects, surgical interventions should aim to provide thorough debridement, implant-surface decontamination and defect reconstruction. In the presence of defects without clear bony walls or with a predominant suprabony component, the aim of the surgical intervention should be the thorough debridement and the repositioning of the marginal mucosa to enable the patient to perform effective oral-hygiene practices, although this aim may compromise the esthetic result of the implant-supported restoration.Periodontology 2000 10/2014; 66(1):255-73. · 4.01 Impact Factor