Aims: Over the past decades, the placement of dental implants has become a routine procedure in the oral rehabilitation of fully and partially edentulous patients. However, the number of patients/implants affected by peri-implant diseases is increasing. As there are -in contrast to periodontitis -at present no established and predictable concepts for the treatment of peri-implantitis, primary prevention is of key importance. The management of peri-implant mucositis is considered as a preventive measure for the onset of peri-implantitis. Therefore, the remit of this working group was to assess the prevalence of peri-implant diseases, as well as risks for peri-implant mucositis and to evaluate measures for the management of peri-implant mucositis. Methods: Discussions were informed by four systematic reviews on the current epidemiology of peri-implant diseases, on potential risks contributing to the development of peri-implant mucositis, and on the effect of patient and of professionally administered measures to manage peri-implant mucositis. This consensus report is based on the outcomes of these systematic reviews and on the expert opinion of the participants. Results: Key findings included: (i) meta-analysis estimated a weighted mean prevalence for peri-implant mucositis of 43% (CI: 32-54%) and for peri-implantitis of 22% (CI: 14-30%); (ii) bleeding on probing is considered as key clinical measure to distinguish between peri-implant health and disease; (iii) lack of regular supportive therapy in patients with peri-implant mucositis was associated with increased risk for onset of peri-implantitis; (iv) whereas plaque accumulation has been established as aetiological factor, smoking was identified as modifiable patient-related and excess cement as local risk indicator for the development of peri-implant mucositis; (v) patient-administered mechanical plaque control (with manual or powered toothbrushes) has been shown to be an effective preventive measure; (vi) professional intervention comprising oral hygiene instructions and mechanical debridement revealed a reduction in clinical signs of inflammation; (vii) adjunctive measures (antiseptics, local and systemic antibiotics, air-abrasive

Peri-implant inflammation was a frequent finding with and without peri-implant bone loss.

Individuals with a history of periodontitis were prone to peri-implantitis, peri-implant bone loss ≥ 2.0 mm and overt in the present study. No association was found between smoking and peri-implant disease in the present study population.

Use of EMD did not result in more improvement in clinical and radiographic parameters compared to the placebo.

The inserted implants showed a high survival rate, especially after the first year of insertion, even though the subjects were not maintained by specialists. All late implant losses were preceded by an early loss. Implant loss was significantly associated with smoking and periodontitis.

The results suggest that PTG and WPTG are both osteoconductive materials that can be used to promote bone formation in osseous defects adjacent to titanium implants without hampering implant osseointegration.

BackgroundChlorhexidine is the gold standard of dental plaque prevention. The aim of the present study was to compare the plaque and gingivitis inhibiting effect of commercial products containing 0.2%, 0.12% and 0.06% chlorhexidine in a modified experimental gingivitis model.MethodsIn three groups of healthy volunteers, experimental gingivitis was induced and monitored over 21 days and simultaneously treated with the commercial solutions containing 0.2%, 0.12% and 0.06% chlorhexidine. The maxillary right quadrant of each individual received mouthwash only, whereas the maxillary left quadrant was subject to both rinsing and mechanical oral hygiene. Compliance and side effects were monitored at days 7, 14, and 21. Plaque and gingivitis scores were obtained at baseline and day 21.ResultsThe commercial mouthwash containing 0.2% chlorhexidine resulted in statistically significantly lower plaque scores than the 0.12 and 0.06% mouthwashes after 21 days use, whereas no statistically significant difference was found between the effects of the two latter.ConclusionA commercially available mouthwash containing 0.2% chlorhexidine had statistically significant better effect in preventing dental plaque than the 0.12% and 0.06% solutions.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02911766. Registration date: September 9th 2016.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12903-017-0400-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

It is concluded that the effect of treatment of hypersensitive teeth with Nd:YAG laser is not different from placebo. The observed effects seem to last for at least 16 weeks.