Abstract
Aim of the study: This RCT assesses patients’ 18-month clinical outcomes after the regenerative therapy of periimplantitis lesions using either an electrolytic method (EC) to remove biofilms or a combination of powder spray and an electrolytic method (PEC). Materials and Methods: Twenty-four patients (24 implants) suffering from periimplantitis were randomly treated by EC or PEC followed by augmentation and submerged healing. Probing pocket depth (PPD), Bleeding on Probing (BoP), suppuration, and standardized radiographs were assessed before surgery (T0), 6 months after augmentation (T1), and 6 (T2) and 12 (T3) months after the replacement of the restoration. Results: The mean PPD changed from 5.8 ± 1.6 mm (T0) to 3.1 ± 1.4 mm (T3). While BoP and suppuration at T0 were 100%, BoP decreased at T2 to 36.8% and at T3 to 35.3%. Suppuration was found to be at a level of 10.6% at T2 and 11.8% at T3. The radiologic bone level measured from the implant shoulder to the first visible bone to the implant contact was 4.9 ± 1.9 mm at mesial sites and 4.4 ± 2.2 mm at distal sites at T0 and 1.7 ± 1.7 mm and 1.5 ± 17 mm at T3. Conclusions: Significant radiographic bone fill and the improvement of clinical parameters were demonstrated 18 months after therapy.
Highlights
Fourteen days after the removal of restorative parts and cleaning with powder spray systems (PSSs), all the sites were infected, Bleeding on Probing (BoP) was positive, suppuration was drained from pockets, and all sites were probed deeper than 5 mm at baseline
A pre-requisite for the successful treatment of periimplantitis is the elimination of its provoking factor
This includes the complete debridement of the peri-implant defect, the thorough decontamination of the implant surface, and the removal of potential contributing factors, as well as protecting the wound environment during the healing phase
Summary
While dental implants have significantly changed the strategies used for the treatment of missing teeth, implant therapy is not without complications. The aim of a successful treatment of periimplantitis is the complete re-osseointegration of the implant surface or at least an elimination of the inflammation and stabilization of the clinical situation. Bone fill has been demonstrated in animal studies, but reosseointegration was limited to 39–46% and no additional benefit of air abrasive therapy compared to other treatment modalities was detected [8]. The aims of this study were first to assess the efficacy of the electrolytic method (EC) in cleaning the contaminated implant surface and secondarily to evaluate if PSS provides any additional benefit. The aim of this study was to follow up the cases 18 months after treatment and months after replacing the restoration to assess the clinical stability of the results
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
