AIM: : Periimplantitis is a bacterial complication after dental implants implantation. Photodynamic therapy (PDT) implies the use of low-power laser in combination with appropriate photosensitizer to increase the detoxification of the implant surfaces. Little information exists about PDT in the treatment of periimplantitis. A randomized comparative case-control study has been conducted with 20 patients and 20 controls to compare the efficacy of antimicrobial PDT versus surgical therapy in patients with periimplantitis, who have received dental implants with rough surfaces. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the surgery group, mucoperiosteal flap surgery was used with scaling on implant surfaces and debridement of granulation tissue. Microbiologic testing was evaluated before and after intervention treatment, at 12 and 24 weeks in the study subjects. DISCUSSION: Total anaerobic counts of bacteria did not differ significantly between patients assigned to receive PDT and those assigned to receive surgical therapy (mean, 95.2% and 80.85%, respectively). PDT was associated with a significant decrease in bleeding scores (P = 0.02) as well as inflammatory exudation (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Treatment with PDT in patients with periimplantitis was not associated with major reduction of total anaerobic bacteria on the rough surfaces of dental implants as compared with surgical therapy. A significantly lower proinflammatory index of periimplantitis was observed in the PDT group at 24 weeks of follow-up.
RCT Entities:
AIM: : Periimplantitis is a bacterial complication after dental implants implantation. Photodynamic therapy (PDT) implies the use of low-power laser in combination with appropriate photosensitizer to increase the detoxification of the implant surfaces. Little information exists about PDT in the treatment of periimplantitis. A randomized comparative case-control study has been conducted with 20 patients and 20 controls to compare the efficacy of antimicrobial PDT versus surgical therapy in patients with periimplantitis, who have received dental implants with rough surfaces. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the surgery group, mucoperiosteal flap surgery was used with scaling on implant surfaces and debridement of granulation tissue. Microbiologic testing was evaluated before and after intervention treatment, at 12 and 24 weeks in the study subjects. DISCUSSION: Total anaerobic counts of bacteria did not differ significantly between patients assigned to receive PDT and those assigned to receive surgical therapy (mean, 95.2% and 80.85%, respectively). PDT was associated with a significant decrease in bleeding scores (P = 0.02) as well as inflammatory exudation (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Treatment with PDT in patients with periimplantitis was not associated with major reduction of total anaerobic bacteria on the rough surfaces of dental implants as compared with surgical therapy. A significantly lower proinflammatory index of periimplantitis was observed in the PDT group at 24 weeks of follow-up.
Authors: Philipp Sahrmann; Fabienne Gilli; Daniel B Wiedemeier; Thomas Attin; Patrick R Schmidlin; Lamprini Karygianni Journal: Microorganisms Date: 2020-05-01
Authors: Maximilian Koch; Maximilian Göltz; Meng Xiangjun; Matthias Karl; Stefan Rosiwal; Andreas Burkovski Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2020-02-09 Impact factor: 4.241
Authors: Rafaela Carriço Porto Baesso; Maria Carolina de Lima Jacy Monteiro Barki; Rebeca de Souza Azevedo; Karla Bianca Fernandes da Costa Fontes; Débora Lima Pereira; Renata Tucci; Fábio Ramôa Pires; Bruna Lavinas Sayed Picciani Journal: BMC Oral Health Date: 2019-12-16 Impact factor: 2.757