Treatment of Peri-implantitis: Surgical Therapeutic Approaches Based on Peri-implantitis Defects

Parma-Benfenati, Stefano; Roncati, Marisa; Tinti, Carlo

doi:10.11607/prd.1549

Cited by 18 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the remaining two studies that used a surgical approach, the reduction in clinical parameters was at least two‐fold compared to studies that used a non‐surgical treatment approach 38,39 . This observation is consistent with the conclusions of other reviews that have compared the effect of type of intervention on peri‐implantitis treatment outcome 45,46 . There seems to be a consensus among researchers that non‐surgical treatment has limited efficacy in yielding clinically significant improvement in the treatment of peri‐implantitis; thus, surgical treatment should be considered the preferred approach 47 …”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

“…38,39 This observation is consistent with the conclusions of other reviews that have compared the effect of type of intervention on peri-implantitis treatment outcome. 45,46 There seems to be a consensus among researchers that non-surgical treatment has limited efficacy in yielding clinically significant improvement in the treatment of peri-implantitis; thus, surgical treatment should be considered the preferred approach. 47 As previously mentioned, the benefit of laser treatment should be investigated as a prequel to surgical treatment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of the Effect of Various Laser Wavelengths in the Treatment of Peri‐Implantitis

Kotsakis

Konstantinidis

Karoussis

et al. 2014

Journal of Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on the limited information currently available, any superiority of laser treatment in comparison to conventional treatment of peri-implantitis could not be identified. Considering the high heterogeneity and the low number of included studies, the authors cautiously conclude that non-surgical laser therapy may be investigated as phase I therapy for the treatment of peri-implantitis. Future research should emphasize detailed description of the specific laser characteristics and power settings in clinical studies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of the Effect of Various Laser Wavelengths in the Treatment of Peri‐Implantitis

Kotsakis

Konstantinidis

Karoussis

et al. 2014

Journal of Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Four articles presented with short follow up with less than 6 months [10-13], two articles were retrospective in design [6,14], one investigation was a review study [15], three articles employed the same study population than other included investigations in the present analysis [16-18], and 1 investigation presented with unclear and incomplete data [19]. …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Non-Surgical Therapy for Peri-Implant Diseases: a Systematic Review

Amo¹,

Yu²,

Wang

2016

JOMR

134

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThe purpose of this paper was to systematically evaluate the effectiveness of non-surgical therapy for the treatment of peri-implant diseases including both, mucositis and peri-implantitis lesions.Material and MethodsAn electronic search in two different databases was performed including MEDLINE (PubMed) and EMBASE from 2011 to 2016. Human studies reporting non-surgical treatment of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis with more than 10 implants and at least 6 months follow up published in English language were evaluated. A systematic review was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of the different methods of decontamination employed in the included investigations. Risk of bias assessment was elaborated for included investigations.ResultsTwenty-five articles were identified of which 14 were further evaluated and included in the analysis. Due to significant heterogeneity in between included studies, a meta-analysis could not be performed. Instead, a systematic descriptive review was performed. Included investigations reported the used of different methods for implant decontamination, including self-performed cleaning techniques, and professionally delivered treatment such as laser, photodynamic therapy, supra-/sub-mucosal mechanical debridement, and air-abrasive devices. Follow-up periods ranged from 6 to 60 months.ConclusionsNon-surgical treatment for peri-implant mucositis seems to be effective while modest and not-predictable outcomes are expected for peri-implantitis lesions. Limitations include different peri-implant diseases definitions, treatment approaches, as well as different implant designs/surfaces and defect characteristics.

show abstract

“…Overall patient health, location of the defect, and progression of the disease are all factors that should be considered. When probing depths exceed 5 mm, bleeding on probing occurs, and conventional nonsurgical options have been exhausted; then surgical intervention involving open debridement with resective or regenerative therapy should be performed [ 19 – 21 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decontamination Using a Desiccant with Air Powder Abrasion Followed by Biphasic Calcium Sulfate Grafting: A New Treatment for Peri-Implantitis

Lombardo

Corrocher

Rovera

et al. 2015

Case Reports in Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Peri-implantitis is characterized by inflammation and crestal bone loss in the tissues surrounding implants. Contamination by deleterious bacteria in the peri-implant microenvironment is believed to be a major factor in the etiology of peri-implantitis. Prior to any therapeutic regenerative treatment, adequate decontamination of the peri-implant microenvironment must occur. Herein we present a novel approach to the treatment of peri-implantitis that incorporates the use of a topical desiccant (HYBENX), along with air powder abrasives as a means of decontamination, followed by the application of biphasic calcium sulfate combined with inorganic bovine bone material to augment the intrabony defect. We highlight the case of a 62-year-old man presenting peri-implantitis at two neighboring implants in positions 12 and 13, who underwent access flap surgery, followed by our procedure. After an uneventful 2-year healing period, both implants showed an absence of bleeding on probing, near complete regeneration of the missing bone, probing pocket depth reduction, and clinical attachment gain. While we observed a slight mucosal recession, there was no reduction in keratinized tissue. Based on the results described within, we conclude that the use of HYBENX and air powder abrasives, followed by bone defect grafting, represents a viable option in the treatment of peri-implantitis.

show abstract

Treatment of Peri-implantitis: Surgical Therapeutic Approaches Based on Peri-implantitis Defects

Cited by 18 publications

References 20 publications

Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of the Effect of Various Laser Wavelengths in the Treatment of Peri‐Implantitis

Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of the Effect of Various Laser Wavelengths in the Treatment of Peri‐Implantitis

Non-Surgical Therapy for Peri-Implant Diseases: a Systematic Review

Decontamination Using a Desiccant with Air Powder Abrasion Followed by Biphasic Calcium Sulfate Grafting: A New Treatment for Peri-Implantitis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About