Amparo Aloy-Prósper1, Hilario Pellicer-Chover2, David Peñarrocha-Oltra3, Miguel Peñarrocha-Diago4. 1. Assistant Professor of Oral Surgery, Stomatology Department, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain. 2. Collaborating Professor of the Master in Oral Surgery and Implant Dentistry, Stomatology Department, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain. 3. Doctor Assistant of Oral Surgery, Stomatology Department, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain. 4. Chairman of Oral Surgery, Stomatology Department, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis includes a correct mechanical debridement of the implant surface to reduce the inflammation and recondition the soft tissues. The aim of the study was to evaluate the results of a single phase of non-surgical therapy by comparing the effect of curettes and ultrasounds versus curettes and abrasive air polisher (Air-Flow) in the peri-implant tissue conditions, and patient satisfaction. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A double-blind randomized and controlled prospective clinical study was conducted on patients in peri-implant maintenance phase diagnosed of peri-implantitis treated in the Oral Surgery Unit of the Stomatology Department of the Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry of the University of Valencia, between September of 2017 and May of 2018. They were divided into 2 groups: Group 1: curettes and ultrasounds, and Group 2: curettes and Air-Flow. The clinical and radiological baseline parameters were evaluated after 3-weeks of treatment, as well as patient satisfaction. RESULTS: The sample included 34 patients. Group 1 (17 patients, 38 implants) and Group 2 (17 patients, 32 implants). All the variables improved statistically significantly after treatment in both groups, with the exception of recessions and keratinized mucosa and bone loss that did not vary. When comparing both groups, the type of treatment did not influence the majority of the variables, with the exception of the plaque index (p=0.011) and modified bleeding index from the palatine (p=0.048), which reduced statistically significant in the group 2, as well as the patient satisfaction which was higher in the group 2 (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: An initial phase of non-surgical treatment achieves an improvement of the peri-implant clinical parameters, thought the method of debridement used seems not to influence. Key words:Peri-implantitis, peri-implant disease, non-surgical treatment, air-abrasive device, mechanical debridement. Copyright:
BACKGROUND: Non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis includes a correct mechanical debridement of the implant surface to reduce the inflammation and recondition the soft tissues. The aim of the study was to evaluate the results of a single phase of non-surgical therapy by comparing the effect of curettes and ultrasounds versus curettes and abrasive air polisher (Air-Flow) in the peri-implant tissue conditions, and patient satisfaction. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A double-blind randomized and controlled prospective clinical study was conducted on patients in peri-implant maintenance phase diagnosed of peri-implantitis treated in the Oral Surgery Unit of the Stomatology Department of the Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry of the University of Valencia, between September of 2017 and May of 2018. They were divided into 2 groups: Group 1: curettes and ultrasounds, and Group 2: curettes and Air-Flow. The clinical and radiological baseline parameters were evaluated after 3-weeks of treatment, as well as patient satisfaction. RESULTS: The sample included 34 patients. Group 1 (17 patients, 38 implants) and Group 2 (17 patients, 32 implants). All the variables improved statistically significantly after treatment in both groups, with the exception of recessions and keratinized mucosa and bone loss that did not vary. When comparing both groups, the type of treatment did not influence the majority of the variables, with the exception of the plaque index (p=0.011) and modified bleeding index from the palatine (p=0.048), which reduced statistically significant in the group 2, as well as the patient satisfaction which was higher in the group 2 (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: An initial phase of non-surgical treatment achieves an improvement of the peri-implant clinical parameters, thought the method of debridement used seems not to influence. Key words:Peri-implantitis, peri-implant disease, non-surgical treatment, air-abrasive device, mechanical debridement. Copyright:
Authors: Frank Schwarz; Kathrin Becker; Klaus-Dieter Bastendorf; Daniele Cardaropoli; Christina Chatfield; Ian Dunn; Paul Fletcher; Johannes Einwag; Anna Louropoulou; Andrea Mombelli; Philip Ower; Pedja Pavlovic; Philipp Sahrmann; Giovanni E Salvi; Petra Schmage; Yasuko Takeuchi; Fridus Van Der Weijden; Stefan Renvert Journal: Quintessence Int Date: 2016-04 Impact factor: 1.677
Authors: Søren Jepsen; Tord Berglundh; Robert Genco; Anne Merete Aass; Korkud Demirel; Jan Derks; Elena Figuero; Jean Louis Giovannoli; Moshe Goldstein; France Lambert; Alberto Ortiz-Vigon; Ioannis Polyzois; Giovanni E Salvi; Frank Schwarz; Giovanni Serino; Cristiano Tomasi; Nicola U Zitzmann Journal: J Clin Periodontol Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 8.728