Blerina Zeza1, Andrea Pilloni. 1. Department of Stomatology and Maxillofacial Sciences, Chair of Periodontology, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy.
Abstract
AIM: Peri-implant mucositis affects 39.4-80% of patients restored with dental implants. If left untreated it evolves in peri-implantitis. Thus far no predictable successful treatment has been reported for peri-implantitis, resulting in implant failure. Proper diagnosis and treatment of peri-implant mucositis is of crucial importance. This study aims to provide a comprehensive review of the available data regarding the effectiveness of peri-implant mucositis treatments in humans, parameters used for the diagnosis and treatment effect evaluation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search for RCT and observational studies on peri-implant mucositis treatments in humans was conducted on Pubmed up to January 2012. CONSORT/STROBE and PRISMA checklists guided the evaluation of studies found and the writing of this review, respectively. RESULTS: Only 5 studies fulfilled the selection criteria. Few possibly effective treatments were studied. Diagnostic parameters reported were clinical only, while treatment effect evaluation was based on clinical and microbiological changes, except for one study reporting biochemical analysis. An evident heterogeneity characterized the follow-up intervals and methods used for reporting parameters changes. CONCLUSIONS: Neither of studied treatments gave complete resolution of peri-implant mucositis. Different treatment strategies need to be studied. Authors suggest guidelines for a protocol of parameters used for determining the sample size, diagnosis and treatment effect, as well as follow-up periods, in order to permit evidence and comparison of different treatments effectiveness.
AIM: Peri-implant mucositis affects 39.4-80% of patients restored with dental implants. If left untreated it evolves in peri-implantitis. Thus far no predictable successful treatment has been reported for peri-implantitis, resulting in implant failure. Proper diagnosis and treatment of peri-implant mucositis is of crucial importance. This study aims to provide a comprehensive review of the available data regarding the effectiveness of peri-implant mucositis treatments in humans, parameters used for the diagnosis and treatment effect evaluation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search for RCT and observational studies on peri-implant mucositis treatments in humans was conducted on Pubmed up to January 2012. CONSORT/STROBE and PRISMA checklists guided the evaluation of studies found and the writing of this review, respectively. RESULTS: Only 5 studies fulfilled the selection criteria. Few possibly effective treatments were studied. Diagnostic parameters reported were clinical only, while treatment effect evaluation was based on clinical and microbiological changes, except for one study reporting biochemical analysis. An evident heterogeneity characterized the follow-up intervals and methods used for reporting parameters changes. CONCLUSIONS: Neither of studied treatments gave complete resolution of peri-implant mucositis. Different treatment strategies need to be studied. Authors suggest guidelines for a protocol of parameters used for determining the sample size, diagnosis and treatment effect, as well as follow-up periods, in order to permit evidence and comparison of different treatments effectiveness.
Entities:
Keywords:
diagnosis parameters; effectiveness evaluation parameters; non-surgical treatment; peri-implant mucositis; study in humans
Authors: Giovanni E Salvi; Marco Aglietta; Sigrun Eick; Anton Sculean; Niklaus P Lang; Christoph A Ramseier Journal: Clin Oral Implants Res Date: 2011-08-02 Impact factor: 5.977
Authors: Marc Quirynen; Roel Vogels; Wouter Peeters; Daniel van Steenberghe; Ignace Naert; Anne Haffajee Journal: Clin Oral Implants Res Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 5.977
Authors: Ralf Smeets; Anders Henningsen; Ole Jung; Max Heiland; Christian Hammächer; Jamal M Stein Journal: Head Face Med Date: 2014-09-03 Impact factor: 2.151