View clinical trials related to Peri-implantitis.
Filter by:A clinical trial comparing laser treatment and conventional mucosal flap surgery for treatment of peri-implantitis. The main aim of the study is to evaluate if treatment of peri-implantitis with a novel blue laser (445 nm) combined with scaling and root planning (SRP) is clinically comparable to conventional mucosal flap surgery in terms of pocket probing depth reduction.
Randomized, surgeon and outcome assessor blinded, multi-centric, superiority trial with two parallel groups and a 1:1 allocation ratio with the aim of comparing the surgical treatment of severe peri-implantitis with or without an initial non surgical approach.
The use of systemic antibiotics as and adjunct to non-surgical peri-implant therapy may be an improvement in comparison to these therapies alone. The primary objective is the evaluation of significant changes in probing pocket depth between non-surgical with or without antibiotics. This is a controlled-placebo clinical trial design. Patients with osseointegrated oral implants will be selected and recruited from a university clinic. Oral hygiene instruction and non-surgical debridement at implants will be provided with ultrasonic devices and immediately after, patients will be prescribed: Group Control: A placebo with the same characteristics as the antibiotic Group Test: Systemic antibiotics (Metronidazole 250mg, 2 capsules three times a day, for 7 days Three and six months after non-surgical treatment, clinical parameters will be registered and radiographs compared using reproducible landmarks. Any adverse event will be also recorded.
This is a multi-centre, randomized clinical trial which evaluates the efficiency of the collagen xenograft (Muco-Graft®) in comparison to the autologous connective tissue graft for the augmentation of keratinized mucosa and gaining hygienic access to the implants diagnosed with peri-implantitis.
The purpose of the study is to observe the effects of two commonly utilized treatment modalities to treat peri-implantitis and to compare the results. The first method of treatment is debridement with curettes and ultrasonic scalers and it represents the traditional approach in the treatment of peri-implantitis. The second method of treatment involves the use of the Biolase laser in addition to the traditional approach of debriding with curettes and ultrasonic scalers. No studies exist comparing these two approaches, and this will serve as a pilot study to explore possible differences. Our research hypothesis is that the addition of Er;Cr;YSGG laser is likely to be more effective in removing the microbiota from a rough implant surface, and that this will manifest with improved clinical parameters in subjects that receive this method of treatment.
A case-control study was performed was performed following the STROBE statement from 1996 to 2016 including patients who were diagnosed with early apical peri-implantitis. Data were collected at the time of implant placement, and once the patients developed signs and symptoms consistent with early apical peri-implantitis, to determine the frequency and etiology of this pathology.
Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate a new mechanical method (Ti-Brush, Straumann, AG, Basel, Switzerland) of implant surface decontamination. Material and methods: A randomized double-blinded controlled clinical trial with a 1-year follow-up it is being carried out. After a hygienic phase, defects were randomly assigned to a control (n=18) or to a test group (n=18). In control group, implant surface was decontaminated both mechanically and chemically with 3% H2O2 and plastic ultrasonic scalers, respectively, while in test group Ti-Brush was added. Infrabony defects in both groups were regenerated with BoneCeramic (Straumann, AG, Basel Switzerland) and collagen barrier membrane Cytoplast (Osteogenics, Lubbock, United States). Clinical and radiographic parameters were measured at baseline, 6, and 12 months after surgery.
Lack of keratinised mucosa around dental implants and teeth is associated with plaque accumulation and worse tissue conditions. However, there is lack of data on the influence of the presence/lack of keratinised mucosa on the periodontal condition. Hence, soft tissue conditioning by grafting with a gingival graft is aimed at improving the quality of the peri-implant conditions
Objective: This study investigated how patients' knowledge, attitude, and perceptions influence their oral hygiene practices as well as peri-implant health. Materials and Methods: Participants with single implant crowns placed in 2007-2011 completed a questionnaire that examined their knowledge, attitude, and perceptions on oral hygiene practices and peri-implant health before receiving a periodontal examination, prophylaxis, and oral hygiene education. Clinical parameters recorded were peri-implant probing depths and plaque index, width of keratinized mucosa, implant crown characteristics, reason for tooth loss, and diagnosis of peri-implant health.
Peri-implantitis are important disease entities as a result of their high prevalence and the lack of a standard mode of therapy. Non-surgical therapy of peri-implant disease, especially when bone loss is not high, appears to be partially effective in resolving the disease. In several cases, however, only limited improvements have been reported in the main clinical parameters (bleeding at the survey and presence of the pocket) and there is a clear tendency to relapse of the disease. In these cases it is therefore recommended to consider adjunctive therapies. Numerous approaches have been used for implant surface decontamination including mechanical, chemical and treatments by means of air-powder or laser. The aim of the present randomized controlled clinical trial will be to assess the efficacy in improving clinical parameters of two further methods of implant surface decontamination (Er:YAG laser or air-abrasive device) after mechanical and chemical cleaning during non surgical treatment of peri-implantitis.