View clinical trials related to Peri-implantitis.
Filter by:Two groups are aimed at being investigated in three centers (CICOM, Clinica Branemark and Clinica Joan Pi) - Test group: Group electrolytic approach (EA): Mechanical detoxification using curettes + NiTi brushes + EA (GalvoSurge) during 2 minutes - Control group: Group hydrogen peroxide (HP): Mechanical detoxification using curettes + NiTi brushes + hydrogen peroxide 5% for 2 minutes soaked in a gauze Patients´ group selection will be randomly allocated. For patients whom their personal clinical record # ends in a number from 0 to 4 will be included in the test group, while for patients whom their personal clinical record # ends from 5-9 will be included in the control group. The infra-osseous component will be regenerated using xenograft (Creos, NB) + autogenous bone in a ratio 1:1 harvested from the adjacent area. A resorbable membrane (Creos, NB) will be placed to compartmentalize the infra-osseous component following a poncho-like approach.
One of the criteria used for long-term implant success is the evaluation of radiographic bone loss. It is known that the keratinized mucosa over the alveolar crest forms a protective barrier against inflammatory infiltration. In addition, it has been reported that the vertical mucosal thickness on the crest is important in the formation of the biological width around the implant. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of vertical mucosal thickness on the alveolar crest on peri-implant marginal bone loss around crestal and subcrestal placed platform-switching implants. In this study, patients will be divided into 2 main groups with vertical mucosal thickness of 2 mm and less and more than 2 mm, and both groups will consist of 2 subgroups as crestally and subcrestally according to the implant level placed. A total of 80 implants will be included, 20 implants in each group. Before starting the surgery, after anesthesia is given, the width of the patient's peri-implant keratinized mucosa and the vertical mucosal thickness over the alveolar crest will be measured. Clinical and radiological measurements will be made in all patients during the prosthetic loading session (T0), at 3rd month (T1), 6th month (T2) and 1 year after loading (T3). With standardized control periapical radiographs to be taken as a result of one-year follow-up, the marginal bone loss amount in the implants will be evaluated using soft-ware.
The use of dental implants is a predictable procedure to replace the missing tooth with high rates of success and survival. In addition, placing the abutment on the same day as the implant surgery is a safe and biologically sound procedure to minimize bone loss and peri-implant inflammation. Although citric acid antibacterial coating has never been tested in vivo, recent in vitro data support its clinical use due to its antibacterial effect at the abutment level. This prospective randomized controlled clinical trial aims to evaluate the microbiological and inflammatory profile of implant abutments coated with citric acid.
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.
This study was designed as a 12-month, two arms, randomized clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy of a supportive treatment protocol (SPIT). Thirty patients were randomized, six months after access-flap surgery, in two different SPIT groups. After ultrasonic debridement, the affected implant surfaces of the test group were treated with glycine powder air-polishing, while implants in the control group a rubber cup and polishing paste was used. Maintenance visits were carried every 3 months and clinical, radiological, microbiological and biochemical variables were registered at baseline (6 months after surgery) and after a follow-up period of 12 months (18 months after surgery).
Objectives: To identify patient and implant indicators influencing the non-surgical therapeutic outcomes of peri-implantitis at 6-months follow-up. Material and methods: This prospective cohort study included patients with at least one implant diagnosed with peri-implantitis according to the 2017 World Workshop. Non-surgical therapy consisted in a mechanical debridement of the peri-implant pockets combined with the metronidazole 500 mg every 8 hours during 7 days. At baseline and at 6 months, clinical and radiographic variables were collected to calculate the success of the therapy. The influence of patient and implant/prosthetic variables on disease resolution were assessed trough simple and multiple logistic regression analysis at patient and implant level using generalized estimation equations models.
This randomized clinical trial evaluates the clinical and microbiological (microbial complexes and changes in the diversity of the submucosal biofilm) effects of MTZ+AMX as adjuncts to anti-infectious surgical treatment plus Er: YAG in the treatment of peri-implantitis.
The existing records of a private practice limited to the practice of periodontology were reviewed to locate patients who had been diagnosed with peri-implantitis (failing dental implant) and had been surgically treated utilizing enamel matrix derivative (Commercially available FDA product Emdogain sold by Straumann USA). Various clinical factors were gathered from the existing records. Some of the factors recorded were: retention of the implant, presence of bleeding, presence of further damage, and presence of inflammation. All patients had signed an informed consent for treatment and the anonymous use of their data for research purposes. All HIPA requirements were followed.
The key objective of the study is to compare the effects of soft tissue augmentation using a volume stable collagen matrix or autogenous connective tissue graft or no soft tissue augmentation in addition to bone grafting/implantoplasty in patients who undergo surgical therapy of peri-implantitis with respect to clinical resolution of the infection.
The primary objective of this study will be to study the correlation between implant position (malposition), evaluated through periapical radiographs of peri-implantitis vs healthy implants, and the occurrence of peri-implant biological complications such as peri-implantitis, as evaluated after at least 6 months from the placement of the prosthesis. The clinical records of all subjects treated with implants during the period between January 1st, 2005, and June 30th, 2021 (last follow-up included: 6 month visit on December 2021) in the Dental Clinic of the IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi (Milan, Italy) will be screened for inclusion. Will be included 45 implants with peri-implantitis and 135 healthy implants regardless of the corresponding number of patients . Descriptive statistics will be provided by means of mean values and standard deviations. Correlation between baseline parameters and outcomes will be measured through regression analysis, being the independent variable the occurrence of peri-implantitis. Multilevel analysis will be performed. For all the analysis, the level of significance was set at p<0.05. For sample size calculation the investigators have considered alpha = .05, power = 80% and a proportion between controls and cases of 3:1. The investigators hypothesized a detection of an effect of malposition with a proportion of 0.25 of exposes in control group and 0.5 in test group. the investigators decided to include 45 implants with peri-implantitis and 135 healthy implants, after augmenting the numbers hypothesizing a maximum of 10% dropouts. The proportion of exposed are estimated on the basis of the study published by Yi et al. in 2020 . The calculation was performed using the method proposed by Schoenfeld.