View clinical trials related to Peri-implant Mucositis.
Filter by:Mechanical debridement is the traditional method for the treatment of peri-implant mucositis and its success depends on the patient's correct oral hygiene. It is believed that probiotics may help by their ability to modulate the oral biofilm, resulting in anti-inflammatory and anti-bacterial plaque action. The aim of this study is to evaluate the adjuvant effect of the probiotic Limosilactobacillus reuteri in the mechanical treatment of peri-implant mucositis. This study aims to include 32 subjects with implant-supported total rehabilitation and peri-implant mucositis, divided into test and control groups, equally subjected to professional mechanical debridement, with the administration of a daily GUM® PerioBalance® lozenge for 30 days added to the test group. Plaque Index, Bleeding Index and probing pocket depth are evaluated before the intervention (baseline) and at 6 and 10 weeks later.
To evaluate the resolution of naturally occurring peri-implant mucositis (PM) treated by means of non-surgical mechanical debridement (NSMD) with or without full-mouth disinfection approach (FMD).
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.
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.
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
The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of non-surgical periodontal therapy with supportive home oral care for the treatment of peri-implant mucositis. Patients with bilateral implants with peri-implant mucositis will undergo professional dental hygiene with ultrasonic handpiece and manual scaler, followed by the application of glycine Airflow powders. Then, patients will be randomly divided into two groups: the Trial Group will undergo a split-mouth application of chlorhexidine gel 1% for quadrants 1 and 4 and of Biorepair Periogel 0.12% for quadrants 2 and 3, with one daily home application for the following 15 days after the visits and the use of Biorepair Parodontogel toothpaste; the control Group will not use any gels. The improvement of peri-implant mucositis will be evaluated between the two groups and differences between the two gels will be assessed, if present.
Introduction: It seems that some local and systemic factors can be associated with an increased incidence of peri-implant diseases. Predisposing to an increase inflammatory response when plaque is present. There is still controversy on which factors can be considered as risk indicators. One of them is the keratinized mucosa width (KM), that seems to facilitate plaque control around implants. Objectives: Assess the relationship between keratinized mucosa and the recurrence of mucositis, comparing bleeding on probing (BOP) in implants with mucositis for 24 weeks after implant disinfection therapy, the control group is defined by having KM ≥ 2 mm and the test group KM < 2 mm. Material and methods: 38 patients presenting one single implant each with a single screw retained crown loaded for at least 1 year. Periodontal maintenance therapy will be performed and oral hygiene instruction will be delivered. Follow up visits will be after 8, 12 and 24 weeks in which the following parameters will be registered: Keratinized Mucosa width, Attached mucosa, Gingival Index, Vestibule Depth, Mucosa Thickness. Probing Pocket Depth, Recession, modified Plaque Index, Bleeding on Probing, modified Bleeding Index. Also a microbiologic test will be taken in the implant sulcus before the periodontal maintenance therapy and at 24 weeks. A multilevel statistical analysis will be conducted comparing the control and the test group, adjusting for the correlation among multiple observations.