Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Clin Periodontol. 2011 Sep;38(9):872-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2011.01762.x. Epub 2011 Jul 19.

Non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis using an air-abrasive device or mechanical debridement and local application of chlorhexidine: a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical study.

Author information

1
Department of Oral Surgery, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:

The aim of this prospective, parallel group designed, randomized controlled clinical study was to evaluate the effectiveness of an air-abrasive device (AAD) for non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS:

Thirty patients, each of whom displayed at least one implant with initial to moderate peri-implantitis, were enrolled in an oral hygiene program (OHI) and randomly instrumented using either (1) AAD (amino acid glycine powder) or (2) mechanical debridement using carbon curets and antiseptic therapy with chlorhexidine digluconate (MDA). Clinical parameters were measured at baseline, 3 and 6 months after treatment [e.g. bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL)].

RESULTS:

At 6 months, AAD group revealed significantly higher (p<0.05; unpaired t-test) changes in mean BOP scores when compared with MDA-treated sites (43.5 ± 27.7%versus 11.0 ± 15.7%). Both groups exhibited comparable PD reductions (AAD: 0.6 ± 0.6 mm versus MDA: 0.5 ± 0.6 mm) and CAL gains (AAD: 0.4 ± 0.7 mm versus MDA: 0.5 ± 0.8 mm) (p>0.05; unpaired t-test, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS:

Within its limitations, the present study has indicated that (i) both treatment procedures resulted in comparable but limited CAL gains at 6 months, and (ii) OHI+AAD was associated with significantly higher BOP reductions than OHI+MDA.

[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley
Loading ...
Support Center