Stuart J Froum1, Alex S Dagba, Ye Shi, Alejandro Perez-Asenjo, Paul S Rosen, Wendy C W Wang. 1. *Clinical Professor and Director of Clinical Research, Department of Periodontology and Implant Dentistry, New York University College of Dentistry, New York, NY; Private Practice, New York, NY. †Former Resident, Department of Periodontology and Implant Dentistry, New York University College of Dentistry, New York, NY; Private Practice, Paris, France. ‡Resident, Department of Periodontology and Implant Dentistry, New York University College of Dentistry, New York, NY. §Visiting Clinical Instructor, Department of Periodontology and Implant Dentistry, New York University College of Dentistry, New York, NY. ¶Clinical Professor of Periodontics, Department of Periodontology, Baltimore College of Dental Surgery, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD; Private Practice, Yardley, Pennsylvania.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim was to identify and evaluate those surgical protocols reporting on positive clinical outcomes for treating peri-implantitis with 12 or more months of follow-up. Method of surface decontamination (SDC) was evaluated for any correlation with outcomes. RESULTS: A literature search was performed of all articles published in English between January 1, 2001 and April 30, 2015. Of the 639 identified, 26 satisfied the inclusion criteria. Outcomes reported on included reductions in bleeding on probing (BoP) and probing depth (PD), mean radiographic bone fill (RBF), and mean change in marginal soft tissue levels (MR±). Methods of SDC included mechanical debridement (MD) with and without saline use, MD plus laser or photodynamic therapy, MD with air powder abrasion, MD with chemotherapeutic implant surface decontamination, and combination approaches. The results suggested that various methods of SDC were effective. Heterogeneity of the studies made it impossible to determine correlations between clinical outcome and SDC method. Most studies over 12 months reporting better treatment outcomes employed a bone replacement. Additionally, studies where patients with periodontitis were treated before their peri-implantitis care also had better outcomes. CONCLUSION: The current review failed to reveal any correlation between any particular method for SDC or defect treatment protocol and positive clinical outcomes. Further comparative studies are warranted to determine the most appropriate approach for both of these topics.
BACKGROUND: The aim was to identify and evaluate those surgical protocols reporting on positive clinical outcomes for treating peri-implantitis with 12 or more months of follow-up. Method of surface decontamination (SDC) was evaluated for any correlation with outcomes. RESULTS: A literature search was performed of all articles published in English between January 1, 2001 and April 30, 2015. Of the 639 identified, 26 satisfied the inclusion criteria. Outcomes reported on included reductions in bleeding on probing (BoP) and probing depth (PD), mean radiographic bone fill (RBF), and mean change in marginal soft tissue levels (MR±). Methods of SDC included mechanical debridement (MD) with and without saline use, MD plus laser or photodynamic therapy, MD with air powder abrasion, MD with chemotherapeutic implant surface decontamination, and combination approaches. The results suggested that various methods of SDC were effective. Heterogeneity of the studies made it impossible to determine correlations between clinical outcome and SDC method. Most studies over 12 months reporting better treatment outcomes employed a bone replacement. Additionally, studies where patients with periodontitis were treated before their peri-implantitis care also had better outcomes. CONCLUSION: The current review failed to reveal any correlation between any particular method for SDC or defect treatment protocol and positive clinical outcomes. Further comparative studies are warranted to determine the most appropriate approach for both of these topics.
Authors: Angeliki Polymeri; David Anssari-Moin; Joyce van der Horst; Daniel Wismeijer; Marja L Laine; Bruno G Loos Journal: Clin Oral Implants Res Date: 2020-09-09 Impact factor: 5.977