Literature DB >> 33725166

Surgical and non-surgical debridement for the treatment of peri-implantitis: a two-center 12-month randomized trial.

Tassiane Panta Wagner1, Paula Rodrigues Pires2, Fernando Silva Rios1, Joao Augusto Peixoto de Oliveira1, Ricardo Dos Santos Araujo Costa1, Kelly F Cunha1, Heraldo Luis Dias Silveira3, Suzana Pimentel2, Marcio Zaffalon Casati2,4, Cassiano Kuchenbecker Rosing1, Alex Nogueira Haas5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare surgical (ST) and non-surgical (NST) debridement for the treatment of peri-implantitis in a two-center randomized trial.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-five individuals with 63 implants with probing depth (PPD) ≥5mm, bleeding on probing (BOP), and radiographic bone loss ≥2mm were included. In the NST (30 implants), submucosal debridement was performed. In the ST (33 implants), a mucoperiosteal flap was raised and surfaces were decontaminated only by debridement as performed in NST. Clinical parameters and radiographs were compared at baseline and after 12 months. Means and standard errors were reported.
RESULTS: PPD considering all implant sites reduced significantly in NST from 4.14±0.25 to 3.25±0.18mm. In ST, PPD also significantly changed (3.74±0.22 to 3.00±0.29mm). No significant differences were observed between the two groups. For deep sites (≥7mm), PPD was 7.82±0.20mm at baseline and reduced to 5.10±0.30mm in NST, while in ST group, it was 7.11±0.11mm and changed to 5.22±0.91mm (between-groups p value=0.51). BOP significantly reduced from ~60 to 35% of all sites in both groups, without significant differences between them. When sites with radiographic bone level ≥3mm at baseline were analyzed, there was a significant difference between groups in bone gain after 12 months in favor of ST (ST=0.78±0.30mm compared to NST=0.25mm±0.13; p=0.03).
CONCLUSIONS: Surgical and non-surgical debridement for the treatment of peri-implantitis present similar clinical outcomes. Bone levels were better improved in ST than NST for sites with higher initial bone loss. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The treatment of peri-implantitis is still a challenge in clinical practice, since less than half of affected implants achieve health after surgical or non-surgical debridement. Considering the lack of clinically relevant differences between these two treatments, non-surgical debridement should be considered the first therapeutic choice for peri-implantitis, mainly mild to moderate cases.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Non-surgical treatment; Peri-implantitis; Surgical treatment

Year:  2021        PMID: 33725166     DOI: 10.1007/s00784-021-03874-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Oral Investig        ISSN: 1432-6981            Impact factor:   3.573


  34 in total

Review 1.  A systematic review of the incidence of biological and technical complications in implant dentistry reported in prospective longitudinal studies of at least 5 years.

Authors:  Tord Berglundh; Leif Persson; Björn Klinge
Journal:  J Clin Periodontol       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 8.728

Review 2.  A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials on non-surgical treatments for peri-implantitis.

Authors:  Clovis M Faggion; Stefan Listl; Nadine Frühauf; Huei-Ju Chang; Yu-Kang Tu
Journal:  J Clin Periodontol       Date:  2014-08-11       Impact factor: 8.728

3.  American Academy of Periodontology best evidence consensus statement on the efficacy of laser therapy used alone or as an adjunct to non-surgical and surgical treatment of periodontitis and peri-implant diseases.

Authors:  Michael P Mills; Paul S Rosen; Leandro Chambrone; Henry Greenwell; Richard T Kao; Perry R Klokkevold; Bradley S McAllister; Mark A Reynolds; Georgios E Romanos; Hom-Lay Wang
Journal:  J Periodontol       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 6.993

Review 4.  Peri-implantitis.

Authors:  Frank Schwarz; Jan Derks; Alberto Monje; Hom-Lay Wang
Journal:  J Periodontol       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 6.993

Review 5.  Treatment of peri-implantitis: what interventions are effective? A Cochrane systematic review.

Authors:  Marco Esposito; Maria Gabriella Grusovin; Helen V Worthington
Journal:  Eur J Oral Implantol       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 3.123

Review 6.  Surgical management of peri-implantitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of treatment outcomes.

Authors:  Hsun-Liang Chan; Guo-Hao Lin; Fernando Suarez; Mark MacEachern; Hom-Lay Wang
Journal:  J Periodontol       Date:  2013-11-21       Impact factor: 6.993

Review 7.  The therapy of peri-implantitis: a systematic review.

Authors:  Lisa J A Heitz-Mayfield; Andrea Mombelli
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 2.804

Review 8.  Efficacy of alternative or adjunctive measures to conventional treatment of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Frank Schwarz; Andrea Schmucker; Jürgen Becker
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2015-08-13

Review 9.  Surgical Regenerative Treatments for Peri-Implantitis: Meta-analysis of Recent Findings in a Systematic Literature Review.

Authors:  Povilas Daugela; Marco Cicciù; Nikola Saulacic
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Res       Date:  2016-09-09

Review 10.  Surgical Non-Regenerative Treatments for Peri-Implantitis: a Systematic Review.

Authors:  Ausra Ramanauskaite; Povilas Daugela; Ricardo Faria de Almeida; Nikola Saulacic
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Res       Date:  2016-09-09
View more
  1 in total

1.  Assessment of salivary alpha amylase and mucin-4 before and after non-surgical treatment of peri-implant mucositis.

Authors:  Hajer A Aldulaijan; Abeer S Al-Zawawi; Marwa Y Shaheen; Dena Ali; Darshan Devang Divakar; Amani M Basudan
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2022-07-14
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.