File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Anti-infective treatment of peri-implant mucositis: A randomised controlled clinical trial

TitleAnti-infective treatment of peri-implant mucositis: A randomised controlled clinical trial
Authors
KeywordsAnti-infective treatment
Chlorhexidine
Non-surgical debridement
Oral hygiene
Peri-implant mucositis
RCT
Issue Date2011
PublisherWiley-Blackwell Publishing, Inc.. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journals/CLR
Citation
Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2011, v. 22 n. 3, p. 237-241 How to Cite?
AbstractAim: To compare the effectiveness of two anti-infective protocols for the treatment of peri-implant mucositis. Materials and methods: Twenty-nine patients with one implant diagnosed with peri-implant mucositis (bleeding on probing [BOP] with no loss of supporting bone) were randomly assigned to a control or test group. Following an assessment of baseline parameters (probing depth, BOP, suppuration, presence of plaque), all patients received non-surgical mechanical debridement at the implant sites and were instructed to brush around the implant twice daily using a gel provided for a period of 4 weeks. The test group (15 patients) received a chlorhexidine gel (0.5%), and the control group (14 patients) received a placebo gel. The study was performed double blind. After 4 weeks, patients were instructed to discontinue using the gel and to continue with routine oral hygiene at the implant sites. Baseline parameters were repeated at 1 and 3 months. Results: At 1 month, there was a statistically significant reduction in the mean number of sites with BOP and mean probing depth measurements at implants in both groups. There were also some statistically significant changes in these parameters from 1 to 3 months. However, there were no statistically significant differences between test and control groups. One month following treatment, 76% of implants had a reduction in BOP. Complete resolution of BOP at 3 months was achieved in 38% of the treated implants. The presence of a submucosal restoration margin resulted in significantly lower reductions in probing depth following treatment. Conclusions: Non-surgical debridement and oral hygiene were effective in reducing peri-implant mucositis, but did not always result in complete resolution of inflammation. Adjunctive chlorhexidine gel application did not enhance the results compared with mechanical cleansing alone. Implants with supramucosal restoration margins showed greater therapeutic improvement compared with those with submucosal restoration margins. © 2011 John Wiley & Sons A/S.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/134335
ISSN
2014 Impact Factor: 3.889
ISI Accession Number ID
Funding AgencyGrant Number
International Team of Implantology (ITI)341-2004
Clinical Research Foundation (CRF) for the Promotion of Oral Health, Brienz, Switzerland
Funding Information:

The authors acknowledge the assistance of Regula Hirschi, Marianne Weibel and Prof. G. Rutger Persson from the Oral Microbiology Laboratory, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Switzerland. This study was supported by an research grant of the International Team of Implantology (ITI) (341-2004) and the Clinical Research Foundation (CRF) for the Promotion of Oral Health, CH-3855 Brienz, Switzerland.

References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHeitzMayfield, LJAen_HK
dc.contributor.authorSalvi, GEen_HK
dc.contributor.authorBotticelli, Den_HK
dc.contributor.authorMombelli, Aen_HK
dc.contributor.authorFaddy, Men_HK
dc.contributor.authorLang, NPen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2011-06-17T09:18:01Z-
dc.date.available2011-06-17T09:18:01Z-
dc.date.issued2011en_HK
dc.identifier.citationClinical Oral Implants Research, 2011, v. 22 n. 3, p. 237-241en_HK
dc.identifier.issn0905-7161en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/134335-
dc.description.abstractAim: To compare the effectiveness of two anti-infective protocols for the treatment of peri-implant mucositis. Materials and methods: Twenty-nine patients with one implant diagnosed with peri-implant mucositis (bleeding on probing [BOP] with no loss of supporting bone) were randomly assigned to a control or test group. Following an assessment of baseline parameters (probing depth, BOP, suppuration, presence of plaque), all patients received non-surgical mechanical debridement at the implant sites and were instructed to brush around the implant twice daily using a gel provided for a period of 4 weeks. The test group (15 patients) received a chlorhexidine gel (0.5%), and the control group (14 patients) received a placebo gel. The study was performed double blind. After 4 weeks, patients were instructed to discontinue using the gel and to continue with routine oral hygiene at the implant sites. Baseline parameters were repeated at 1 and 3 months. Results: At 1 month, there was a statistically significant reduction in the mean number of sites with BOP and mean probing depth measurements at implants in both groups. There were also some statistically significant changes in these parameters from 1 to 3 months. However, there were no statistically significant differences between test and control groups. One month following treatment, 76% of implants had a reduction in BOP. Complete resolution of BOP at 3 months was achieved in 38% of the treated implants. The presence of a submucosal restoration margin resulted in significantly lower reductions in probing depth following treatment. Conclusions: Non-surgical debridement and oral hygiene were effective in reducing peri-implant mucositis, but did not always result in complete resolution of inflammation. Adjunctive chlorhexidine gel application did not enhance the results compared with mechanical cleansing alone. Implants with supramucosal restoration margins showed greater therapeutic improvement compared with those with submucosal restoration margins. © 2011 John Wiley & Sons A/S.en_HK
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherWiley-Blackwell Publishing, Inc.. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journals/CLRen_HK
dc.relation.ispartofClinical Oral Implants Researchen_HK
dc.rightsThe definitive version is available at www3.interscience.wiley.com-
dc.subjectAnti-infective treatmenten_HK
dc.subjectChlorhexidineen_HK
dc.subjectNon-surgical debridementen_HK
dc.subjectOral hygieneen_HK
dc.subjectPeri-implant mucositisen_HK
dc.subjectRCTen_HK
dc.titleAnti-infective treatment of peri-implant mucositis: A randomised controlled clinical trialen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=0905-7161&volume=22&issue=3&spage=237&epage=241&date=2011&atitle=Anti-infective+treatment+of+peri-implant+mucositis:+a+randomised+controlled+clinical+trial-
dc.identifier.emailLang, NP:nplang@hkucc.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityLang, NP=rp00031en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02078.xen_HK
dc.identifier.pmid21251076en_HK
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-79551549639en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros185679en_US
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-79551549639&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume22en_HK
dc.identifier.issue3en_HK
dc.identifier.spage237en_HK
dc.identifier.epage241en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000286891100001-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridHeitzMayfield, LJA=6602309146en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridSalvi, GE=35600695300en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridBotticelli, D=6601962395en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridMombelli, A=7006180872en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridFaddy, M=7003927846en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLang, NP=7201577367en_HK
dc.identifier.citeulike8799312-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats