View clinical trials related to Peri-implant Mucositis.
Filter by:Various risk factors defined in the literature should be eliminated in order for the patient to be able to use implant-supported prostheses for a longer period of time. In the literature, such a diagram for peri-implant risk factors was first described by Heitz-Mayfield in 2020. The scheme that will determine the peri-implant risk diagram is called "Implant Disease Risk Assessment (IDRA)". This tool provides evaluation of various risk factors on a single diagram. In this study, peri-implant risk diagrams will be determined by calling the patients who have previously completed implant treatment in Kütahya University of Health Sciences Faculty of Dentistry Department of Periodontology, and the change in the risk profile assessment will be re-evaluated after the risk factors that can be eliminated are eliminated. In this study, it is aimed to predict the risk of inflammation and alveolar bone loss of the tissues around the implant that may occur in the future in patients who have undergone dental implant treatment, and to evaluate the risk profiles.
1. Objectives: To evaluate the influence of the shape and contour of implant-supported restorations on peri-implant soft and hard tissues by using an intraoral scanner. 2. Material and methods: 1. Number of patients to be treated: 120 2. Number of visits per patient: 1 3. Brief description of the different techniques used in the study, authorized and validated in the literature (3-5 lines). A clinical and radiographic evaluation of the dental implants of those patients who are undergoing maintenance therapy treated by the Department of Periodontics of the International University of Catalonia prior to 2017 will be carried out. Additionally, a digital scan of the crown will be carried out using a intraoral scanner. Finally, patients will fill out a questionnaire about their routine dental care. 4. Benefits and harms of participating in the study for the patient Participating in this study implies irradiating the patient through a periapical x-ray in order to assess the bone level of their implants and therefore be able to diagnose the presence or absence of peri-implant disease. Regarding the possible benefits, the patient will help the scientific community to determine the ideal contour and shape of the implant-supported restoration that will prevent the appearance of peri-implant diseases. Likewise, patients will undergo an exhaustive clinical and radiographic review that will allow their dental and periodontal status to be updated. 5. Alternative treatment in case the patient does not wish to participate in the clinical study As this is an observational study, there is no alternative treatment. The patient will have absolute freedom to decline to participate in the study. 6. Treatment to be carried out in the event that complications arise in the patient, once the clinical study has begun If after handling the prosthesis, it is detected that any of the screws that support the prostheses are loose or defective, the MORE department will be informed in order to replace said accessory. On the other hand, they would be informed in the same way in case of detecting any complication/alteration with the patient's implant-supported crowns. 7. Material needed to carry out the study ( To carry out this study, you will need posterior radiographic positioners, radiographs, an intraoral scanner (3Shape Trios®), the implant analogs or replicas, and a basic periodontal examination set (exploratory probe, periodontal probe, Nabers probe, mirror). and tweezers). 3. Evaluation of experimental and statistical results (3 lines) - The data obtained will be analyzed through a descriptive statistical analysis (mean, median and standard deviations). The qualitative variables will be expressed in frequencies and percentages. In addition, logistic regression analyzes will be performed to determine the association between peri-implant status (at the implant and patient level) and the angle/emergence of implant-supported prostheses.
the objective of this study is to determine the incidence of peri-implant mucositis in patients with treated periodontitis and enrolled in periodontal maintenance and to evaluate the associated risk indicators. An analytical prospective observational study will be carried out, with an initial follow-up of 12 months.
Various types of periodontal probes (e.g., metal probes, plastic/bendable probes, electronic periodontal probes) are used for peri-implant pocket depth registration; however, depending on the shape and size of the prosthetic restoration an accurate peri-implant pocket registration might be impeded with standard metal probes. There is currently no systematic assessment of which probe is more accurate in peri-implant pocket registration. Therefore, peri-implant pocket registration of 50 patients with a screw-retained prosthetic restoration will be recorded with 3 different periodontal probes; i.e., with a metal probe, with a plastic probe, and with an automatic periodontal probe, before and after removal of the prosthetic restoration.
This is a randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT). After signing the informed consent, patients satisfying the inclusion criteria will undergo supragingival and subgingival professional oral hygiene of both arches performed with ultrasonic instrumentation with PEEK inserts, manual instrumentation with PEEK curettes and air polishing with glycine powder. After that, the sample will be randomly divided into 2 groups based on the domiciliary assigned treatment: - Aftoral® Oral Gel solution with Hyaluronic Acid, Xylitol and glycerophosphoinositol for the domiciliary use for 15 days for 2 peri-implant mucositis sites. - Unidea® Chlorhexidine digluconate Mouthwash 0,20% administration for the domiciliary application for 15 days for 2 peri-implant sites. The study will last 6 months. Patients will be visited at: T0, after 1 month from T0 (T1), after 3 months (T2), after 6 months (T3). Professional hygiene will be performed again at T2 and T3. At each recall session were collected a satisfaction questionnaire of the products (taste, smell, consistency, persistence and ease of application) and the following periodontal clinical indices, using a PEEK probe on each peri-implant site: - conditions of the marginal mucosa (swelling and erythema), - migration of the marginal mucosa, - PPD (Probing Pocket Depth), - BOP% (Bleeding on Probing), - BS (Bleeding Score), - Suppuration, - PCR% (Plaque Control Record),
This is a split-mouth randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT). After signing the informed consent, patients satisfying the inclusion criteria will undergo supragingival and subgingival professional oral hygiene of both arches performed with ultrasonic instrumentation with PEEK inserts, manual instrumentation with titanium curettes and air polishing with glycine powder. After that, the following treatment will be randomly assigned: - Ozoral Pro and Ozoral gel administration and home application for 2 peri-implant mucositis sites. - Curasept chlorhexidine gel 1% administration and domiciliary application for 14 days for 2 peri-implant contralateral sites. The study will last 6 months. Patients will be visited at: T0, after 1 month from T0 (T1), after 3 months (T2), after 6 months (T3). Professional hygiene will be performed again at T2 and T3. At each recall session, the following periodontal clinical indices were collected using a probe on each peri-implant site: BOP, GBI, conditions of the marginal mucosa (swelling and erythema), suppuration, migration of the marginal mucosa, PD, PI ,BS.
This is a randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) with a split-mouth design. After signing the informed consent, patients satisfying the inclusion criteria will undergo supragingival and subgingival professional oral hygiene of both arches performed with ultrasonic instrumentation with PEEK inserts, manual instrumentation with titanium curettes and air polishing with glycine powder. After that, the following treatment will be randomly assigned: - Ozoral Pro and Ozoral gel administration and home application for 2 peri-implant mucositis sites. - Curasept chlorhexidine gel 1% administration and domiciliary application for 14 days for 2 peri-implant contralateral sites. The study will last 2 years. Patients will be visited at: T0, after 1 month from T0 (T1), after 3 months (T2), after 6 months (T3), after 9 months (T4), after 12 months (T5), after 15 months (T6), after 18 months (T7), after 21 months (T8) and after 24 months (T9). For each time point, (except for T1), professional hygiene will be performed again. At each recall session, the following periodontal clinical indices were collected using a probe on each peri-implant site: BOP, GBI, conditions of the marginal mucosa (swelling and erythema), suppuration, migration of the marginal mucosa, PD, PI ,BS.
Soldiers operate in environments that are more likely to lead to oral trauma, risking poor dentition which can directly impact military readiness. Dental restoration can often be accomplished via dental implant insertion. Microbiome-associated complications that result in bone loss, including the micro-leakage of bacterial species proliferating in the dental implant internal cavity, frequently lead to implant failure. Reduction in implant bacterial load may result in a shift of the composition of the microbiome in favor of less pathogenic species, potentially improving dental implant success rates, reducing surgical revisions, and associated cost savings. This study aims to determine how disinfectant gel (hydrogen peroxide or chlorhexidine) insertion into dental implant internal cavities affects implant failure rates, bacterial load and microbiome composition.
Although smoking has been proposed as well, as a risk factor/indicator for peri-implantitis, there is currently no conclusive evidence. The current literature confronts the inconclusive evidence of tobacco for a risk factor. Therefore, the aim of the present investigation is to determine the association between tobacco and peri-implantitis in sample of patients who had received therapy implant-supported restorative therapy in a university setting. The present study was designed as a retrospective case control study in a sample of patients with implant-supported restorative therapy 7-19 years after restorative phase. The study was conducted at the Clinica Universitaria d'Odontologia (CUO) in the Universitat Internacional de Catalunya (UIC) for 1 month and was performed following the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki (revised, amended, and clarified in 2013. Prior to enrol the study a written informed consent was signed. Patients provided with implant-supported restorative therapy between 2001-2013 was selected from the UIC database. The sample was divided in three groups: healthy patients, patients with mucositis and patients with peri-implantitis. During the examination, the clinician reviewed with the patient the Information and Medication History Forms and record the anthropometric, socio-demographic and clinical information. An initial questionnaire was conducted to obtain information regarding age, gender, medical history, medication, and health behaviour. Candidates underwent an oral pathology examination and a full-mouth probing using a standardize pressure (20N) probe SONDA PA_ON (Orange Dental®, Aspachstr, Biberach, Germany) to determine their periodontal and peri-implant status. All statistical analyses were performed with the package RStudio (V2.5). Descriptive characteristics regarding all the covariates were summarized. Periimplant bone loss (95% Confidence Interval - 95% CI) were calculated both at implant- and at patient-level. A multilevel regression model will be applied to evaluate the influence of some risk/protective indicators on the risk for peri-implant bone loss. Risk/protective indicators for periimplantitis will be studied using multilevel (mixed-effects) multivariate regression analyses (patient- and implant-level). Each potential indicator was tested individually by adding it to an empty model having as dependent variable the peri-implant status and testing the significance.
patients were randomly divided into Maxi-Z plus dental implant group versus Maxi-Z implant group