Fawaz Alqahtani1, Mana Alqahtani2, Syed S Shafqat3, Zohaib Akram4, Abdulaziz A Al-Kheraif5, Fawad Javed6,7. 1. Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University, Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia. 2. Faculty of Medicine, University of Tabuk, Tabuk, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. 3. Faculty of Dentistry, Ziauddin Medical University, Karachi, Pakistan. 4. Department of Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, Ziauddin-University, Karachi, Pakistan. 5. Dental Biomaterials Research Chair, Dental Health Department, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. 6. Department of Periodontology, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York. 7. Laboratory for Periodontal-, Implant-, Phototherapy (LA-PIP), School of Dental Medicine, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Efficacy of mechanical debridement (MD) with adjunctive probiotic therapy (PT) in the treatment of peri-implant mucositis (PiM) in cigarette-smoking and never-smoking subjects remains uninvestigated. PURPOSE: The aim was to assess the efficacy of MD with adjunctive PT in the treatment of PiM in cigarette-smoking and never-smoking individuals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with (group I) and without PiM (group II) were included. Demographic data was collected using a questionnaire. Treatment-wise, patients in groups I and II were subdivided into: (a) Patients that underwent MD with adjunct PT (using Lactobacillus reuteri); and (b) MD alone. In all groups, probing depth (PD), plaque index (PI), and bleeding on probing (BOP) were measured at baseline and compared after 3- and 6-months. Baseline peri-implant crestal bone levels were also measured. Sample-size estimation was performed, and statistical comparisons were done using one-way analysis of variance and Bonferroni post-hoc adjustment tests. P values under .05 were deemed significant. RESULTS: Eighty individuals (group I: 40 cigarette-smokers and group II: 40 never-smokers) with PiM participated in this study. At all-time intervals, no significant difference in PD, PI, and BOP were observed in all patients in group I. At 3-months' follow-up, the differences in BOP (P < .05), and PI (P < .05) were significantly higher in group II that underwent MD + PT than MD alone. At 6-months' follow-up, there was no difference in the changes in BOP and PI among subjects that underwent MD with and without adjunct PT. CONCLUSION: On a short-term basis, MD with adjunct PT is more effectual in the treatment of PiM than MD alone in never-smokers. Cigarette-smoking compromises peri-implant soft tissue healing following MD with or without adjunct PT.
BACKGROUND: Efficacy of mechanical debridement (MD) with adjunctive probiotic therapy (PT) in the treatment of peri-implant mucositis (PiM) in cigarette-smoking and never-smoking subjects remains uninvestigated. PURPOSE: The aim was to assess the efficacy of MD with adjunctive PT in the treatment of PiM in cigarette-smoking and never-smoking individuals. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Patients with (group I) and without PiM (group II) were included. Demographic data was collected using a questionnaire. Treatment-wise, patients in groups I and II were subdivided into: (a) Patients that underwent MD with adjunct PT (using Lactobacillus reuteri); and (b) MD alone. In all groups, probing depth (PD), plaque index (PI), and bleeding on probing (BOP) were measured at baseline and compared after 3- and 6-months. Baseline peri-implant crestal bone levels were also measured. Sample-size estimation was performed, and statistical comparisons were done using one-way analysis of variance and Bonferroni post-hoc adjustment tests. P values under .05 were deemed significant. RESULTS: Eighty individuals (group I: 40 cigarette-smokers and group II: 40 never-smokers) with PiM participated in this study. At all-time intervals, no significant difference in PD, PI, and BOP were observed in all patients in group I. At 3-months' follow-up, the differences in BOP (P < .05), and PI (P < .05) were significantly higher in group II that underwent MD + PT than MD alone. At 6-months' follow-up, there was no difference in the changes in BOP and PI among subjects that underwent MD with and without adjunct PT. CONCLUSION: On a short-term basis, MD with adjunct PT is more effectual in the treatment of PiM than MD alone in never-smokers. Cigarette-smoking compromises peri-implant soft tissue healing following MD with or without adjunct PT.