Electrolytic Surface Decontamination in the Reconstructive Therapy of Peri-Implantitis: Single-Center Outcomes of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Alberto Monje, Ramón Pons, Pedro Peña
{"title":"Electrolytic Surface Decontamination in the Reconstructive Therapy of Peri-Implantitis: Single-Center Outcomes of a Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Alberto Monje, Ramón Pons, Pedro Peña","doi":"10.11607/prd.7151","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Surface decontamination in the reconstructive therapy of peri-implantitis is of paramount importance to achieve favorable outcomes. The objective of this single-center study derived from a large multicenter clinical trial was to compare the electrolytic method (EM) used as an adjunct to mechanical decontamination, to hydrogen peroxide (HP) also used as an adjunct to mechanical decontamination, in the reconstructive therapy of peri-implantitis. At 12-month (T2) follow-up, 19 patients (Nimplants&#61; 23) completed the study. None of the tested modalities demonstrated superiority in terms of the assessed clinical parameters. Only mucosal recession showed higher stability in the EM group. Alike, radiographic marginal bone level gain and defect angle changes at T2 did not differ between the evaluated strategies. Notably, disease resolution was ∼16% higher in the EM; however, differences did not reach statistical significance. Additionally, it was demonstrated that pocket depth and intra-bony component depth at baseline were predictors of disease resolution. In conclusion, the EM combined with mechanical instrumentation results in a safe and effective surface decontamination modality in the reconstructive therapy of peri-implantitis. This strategy resulted in ∼91% disease resolution rate.</p>","PeriodicalId":94231,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-23"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/prd.7151","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Surface decontamination in the reconstructive therapy of peri-implantitis is of paramount importance to achieve favorable outcomes. The objective of this single-center study derived from a large multicenter clinical trial was to compare the electrolytic method (EM) used as an adjunct to mechanical decontamination, to hydrogen peroxide (HP) also used as an adjunct to mechanical decontamination, in the reconstructive therapy of peri-implantitis. At 12-month (T2) follow-up, 19 patients (Nimplants= 23) completed the study. None of the tested modalities demonstrated superiority in terms of the assessed clinical parameters. Only mucosal recession showed higher stability in the EM group. Alike, radiographic marginal bone level gain and defect angle changes at T2 did not differ between the evaluated strategies. Notably, disease resolution was ∼16% higher in the EM; however, differences did not reach statistical significance. Additionally, it was demonstrated that pocket depth and intra-bony component depth at baseline were predictors of disease resolution. In conclusion, the EM combined with mechanical instrumentation results in a safe and effective surface decontamination modality in the reconstructive therapy of peri-implantitis. This strategy resulted in ∼91% disease resolution rate.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
电解表面净化在种植体周围炎修复治疗中的应用:随机对照试验的单中心结果。
在种植体周围炎的修复治疗中,表面净化对取得良好疗效至关重要。本单中心研究源自一项大型多中心临床试验,目的是比较电解法(EM)与过氧化氢法(HP)在种植体周围炎修复治疗中的效果,前者是机械净化的辅助方法,后者也是机械净化的辅助方法。在 12 个月(T2)的随访中,19 名患者(Nimplants= 23)完成了研究。从评估的临床参数来看,没有一种测试模式显示出优越性。只有粘膜衰退显示 EM 组的稳定性更高。同样,在 T2 阶段,放射学边缘骨水平增加和缺损角度变化在评估策略之间也没有差异。值得注意的是,EM 组的疾病缓解率要高出 16%,但差异没有达到统计学意义。此外,基线时的牙槽窝深度和骨内成分深度也是疾病缓解的预测因素。总之,在种植体周围炎的修复治疗中,EM结合机械器械是一种安全有效的表面净化方式。该策略的疾病治愈率高达 91%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Effect of Cement- Versus Screw-Retained Implant Positioning in the Esthetic Zone on Emergence Angle: A Proof-of-Principle Study. The Management of Gingival Fenestration: A Series of Three Cases. Artificial Intelligence Chatbots in Patient Communication: Current Possibilities. Autonomous Dental Implant Robotic System Utilization for Implant Placement and Transcrestal Sinus Elevation Using Osseodensification: A Case Report. Alveolar Ridge Preservation Procedures Performed with Freeze-Dried Bone Allograft: Clinical and Histologic Outcomes in a Case Series: Part II.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1