Efficacy of periimplant mechanical debridement with and without adjunct antimicrobial photodynamic therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Abstract

ObjectiveThere are no studies that have assessed the efficacy of mechanical debridement (MD) with and without adjunct antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) in the treatment of periimplant inflammation in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The aim of the present 12-month follow-up study was to assess the efficacy of MD with and without adjunct aPDT in the treatment of periimplant inflammation in patients with T2DM. MethodsSixty-seven patients with diagnosed periimplant inflammation and T2DM were included. Treatment-wise, the patients were divided into 2 groups: (a) test-group (n=34): patients receivedMD+aPDT; and (b) control group (n=33): patients received MD only. Periimplant bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD) ≥4mm and mesial and distal marginal bone loss (MBL) were measured at baseline and after 6 and 12 months of therapy in both groups. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare the periimplant BOP, PD, MBL and HbA1c levels in both groups. P-values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. ResultsMean preoperative hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) for patients in the control group and test group were 8.5% and 8.8%, respectively. In the control group, there was no significant difference in HbA1c levels at all follow-up durations. Among patients in test group, there was a significant decrease (P<0.05) in HbA1c levels at 6 and 12 months of follow-up. Both PD and BOP were significantly lower in the test group compared to the control group at all follow-up durations. At 6 and 12 months of follow-up, there was no significant difference in MBL in both groups. ConclusionIn patients with T2DM, MD with adjunct aPDT is more effective in the treatment of periimplant inflammation compared with MD alone.