Peri-implant maintenance of immediate function implants: a pilot study comparing hyaluronic acid and chlorhexidine. The effect of an antiseptic mouthrinse on implant maintenance: plaque and peri-implant gingival tissues. Therapy of peri-implantitis with resective surgery. A 3-year clinical trial on rough screw-shaped oral implants. Part I: clinical outcome. Clinical and microbiologic effects of chemical versus mechanical cleansing in professional supportive implant therapy. Relative effectiveness of powered and manual toothbrushes in elderly patients with implant-supported mandibular overdentures. Treatment of peri-implantitis by the Vector system. Treatment of incipient peri-implant infections using topical minocycline microspheres versus topical chlorhexidine gel as an adjunct to mechanical debridement. Effects of subgingival chlorhexidine irrigation on peri-implant maintenance. Cemented versus screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth crowns: a 4-year prospective clinical study.
In implants, maintenance assumes an important role. The role of chlorhexidine (CHX) is well known in maintenance, while only limited evidence exists on the practical use of hyaluronic acid (HA). The objective of this study was to compare the health status of the peri-implant complex (hard and soft tissues surrounding the implant) during the healing period of immediate function implants, using HA or CHX gels in the patient's maintenance protocol. STUDY POPULATION AND METHODOLOGY: Thirty complete edentulous patients, with four immediate function Brånemark System implants placed in the mandible (total of 120 implants), were randomly assigned to two groups (HA and CHX) using only these two chemicals in their daily implant self-care. Both groups were followed up for 6 months, with clinical observations on the 10th day, 2 months, 4 months and 6 months post-surgically.
                During the course of the study, HA and CHX produced good results in maintaining a healthy peri-implant complex in immediate function implants for complete rehabilitations in the edentulous mandible. Statistically significant differences were found in favour of the HA group in the modified bleeding index on the second observation (P = 0.003). The difference was more marked in the axial implants placed in the fifth sextant (P = 0.05). Correlation coefficient between plaque and bleeding index revealed a potentially better result for CHX at 6 months.
                The findings point out the importance of a maintenance protocol in immediate function implants. Both chemicals are valid tools for implant maintenance. The authors suggest that it might be advantageous to administer HA in the first 2 months and CHX between 2 and 6 months. The purpose of this controlled double-blind, parallel, randomized clinical study was to determine the effect of antiseptic mouthrinse on parameters important to dental implant maintenance. Plaque, peri-implant gingivitis, gingival bleeding, probing depth, and attachment level were assessed over a 3-month test period. Twenty healthy adult patients each of whom had at least two dental implants, a modified gingival index > 1.5, and a modified Quigley-Hein plaque index score > 1.7 were enrolled into the study. After a thorough oral prophylaxis, patients were randomly assigned to either the antiseptic mouthrinse or a 5% hydroalcohol placebo mouthrinse group and instructed to rinse twice daily for 30 seconds with 20 ml of their assigned mouthrinse as an adjunct to their usual oral hygiene procedures. The baseline examination included plaque index, gingival index, bleeding index, probing depth measurement, and attachment level measurements. The plaque and gingival indices were rescored at 1, 2, and 3 months. Probing depths, attachment levels, and bleeding index were determined again at 3 months only. At the end of 3 months, the antiseptic mouthrinse group had statistically significant reductions in plaque index, gingival index, and bleeding index compared to the placebo group. There were no significant differences between groups in probing depth or attachment level. The results of this clinical study indicate that twice daily use of an antiseptic mouthrinse may provide benefits in the maintenance of dental implants. The purpose of this randomized clinical trial was to compare the clinical outcome of two different surgical approaches for the treatment of peri-implantitis. Seventeen patients with ITI(R) implants were included consecutively over a period of 5 years. The patients were randomized with a lottery assignment. Ten patients were treated with resective surgery and modification of surface topography (test group). The remaining seven patients were treated with resective surgery only (control group). Clinical parameters (suppuration, modified plaque index - mPI, modified bleeding index - mBI, probing pocket depth - PPD, pseudopocket - DIM, mucosal recession - REC, probing attachment level - PAL) were recorded at baseline, as well as 6, 12, 24 and 36 months after treatment. The cumulative survival rate for the implants of the test group was 100% after 3 years. After 24 months, two hollow-screw implants of control group were removed because of mobility. Consequently, the cumulative survival rate was 87.5%. The recession index in the control group was significantly lower than in the test group at 24 months (Student's t-value of -2.14). On the contrary, control group showed higher PPD, PAL and mBI indexes than test group (Student's t-values of +5.5, +2.4 and +9.61, respectively). The PPD and mBI indexes for the implants of the control group were significantly higher at baseline than 24 months later (Student's t-values of +3.18 and +3.33, respectively). Recession and PAL indexes resulted in values significantly lower than baseline (Student's t-values of -4.62 and -2.77, respectively). For the implants of the test group PPD and mBI indexes were significantly higher at baseline than 36 months after (Student's t-values of +11.63 and +16.02, respectively). Recession index resulted in values significantly lower at baseline (Student's t-value of -5.05). No statistically significant differences were found between PAL index measurement at baseline and 36 months later (Student's t-value of +0.89). In conclusion, resective therapy associated with implantoplasty seems to influence positively the survival of oral implants affected by inflammatory processes. The aim of the present study was to compare the cleansing properties of mechanical supportive care for dental implants with the use of an etching gel. Sixteen patients underwent a 5-month clinical trial with monthly recalls. These patients, wearing maxillary complete dentures and mandibular overdentures supported by a bar device on 4 implants, were treated in a split-mouth study design. Test and control therapy were randomly assigned to left and right sides of the mandible. At the test side, 35% phosphoric etching gel (pH 1) was applied in the peri-implant sulcus. After 1 minute, the sulcus was thoroughly rinsed with a water spray for approximately 15 seconds per implants. Control therapy consisted of supra- and subgingival debridement using carbon fiber curettes and a rubber cup. Plaque, calculus, probing pocket depth, and modified Gingival Index were determined before each treatment. Microbiologic evaluation was performed at baseline, 1 month later, and 5 months later, just before and immediately after each treatment. Per treatment and per assessment, the mean scores of all clinical parameters were calculated for each patient. The number of colony-forming units was used as the primary efficacy variable in the analysis of microbiologic data. At baseline, no differences between test and control sites were observed for any of the clinical parameters. The mean Gingival Index and the mean probing pocket depth were reduced over the 5-month period. The mean reduction in Gingival Index at the test sites proved to be significantly larger at the control sites (P = .03). Both treatment modalities resulted in an instant reduction of the number of colony-forming units, where the reduction by chemical cleaning was larger (P < .05). This short-term study employing a high recall frequency indicates that local application of 35% phosphoric acid gel can be as effective as conventional mechanical supportive therapy. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical effectiveness of a powered toothbrush (Braun Oral-B Plaque Remover 3-D) and a manual soft toothbrush (Oral-B Squish-grip brush) for the control of supragingival plaque and soft tissue inflammation around implants supporting mandibular overdentures.
                The study sample involved 40 edentulous subjects, aged 55-80 years, having 2 unsplinted mandibular implants supporting a complete removable overdenture opposed by a maxillary complete denture. In this single-blinded, randomised, cross-over clinical trial, two 6-week experimental phases were separated by a 2-week wash-out period. 2 weeks prior to each experimental phase (pre-entry visits), implant abutments were polished to remove all plaque and a standardised instruction in the use of the toothbrush was given. Modified plaque and bleeding indices were recorded at the start and end of each experimental period. Mean index scores at each phase were analysed using paired t-test, and the mean number of sites showing a change in plaque or mucositis were compared using the Mann-Whitney U-test. Combined data from 2 different implant systems were considered after controlling for implant type.
                Only minor changes in plaque and bleeding scores were observed following the two test periods. There were no statistically significant differences between the manual and powered toothbrushes.
                Manual and powered brushes were found to be of comparable efficacy with regard to improvement in peri-implant bleeding and plaque indices. To compare the effectiveness of treatment of peri-implantitis with a novel ultrasonic device, the Vector system, with that of subgingival debridement with carbon fiber curettes.
                The study, comprising 11 patients with at least two screw type implants with bleeding on probing (BOP), probing pocket depth (PPD) > or =5 mm, and at least 1.5 mm radiographic bone loss and exposed implant threads, was carried out as a single blind randomized clinical trial. At baseline one randomly chosen implant in each patient was treated by the Vector system (test) while the other implant (control) was treated by submucosal debridement with a carbon fiber curette. After 3 months, the same treatments were repeated. Plaque, BOP, and PPD were recorded on all implant surfaces at baseline, and after 3 and 6 months. Bone levels were recorded on radiographs taken prior to the start of the study, and after 6 months.
                Oral hygiene around both test and control implants was improved at 3 and 6 months compared with baseline. At 6 months, four of the Vector-treated sites, and only one site treated with curettes, had stopped to bleed. In neither the test nor the control group, were there any differences between baseline and 6 months regarding PPD and bone levels.
                Although there was a greater reduction in the number of sites with BOP following treatment with the Vector system than following instrumentation with carbon fiber curettes, there was no significant difference between the two methods. This report presents the clinical results three months after application of minocycline microspheres as an adjunct to mechanical treatment of incipient peri-implant infections compared to adjunctive treatment employing 1% chlorhexidine gel application. Sixteen patients in the minocycline group and 14 in the chlorhexidine group completed the study. Each patient had one or more implants with probing depth > or = 4 mm combined with bleeding and/or exudate on probing and presence of putative pathogenic bacteria. At baseline, patients were randomly assigned to minocycline or chlorhexidine treatment. Follow-up examinations were carried out after 10, 30, 60 and 90 days. The combined mechanical/antimicrobial treatment for the chlorhexidine group did not result in any reduction in probing depth and only limited reduction of bleeding scores. The adjunctive use of minocycline microspheres, on the other hand, resulted in improvements in both probing depths and bleeding scores. For the deepest sites of the treated implants, mean probing depth was reduced from 5.0 mm to 4.1 mm. The reductions in bleeding scores, although greater than for the chlorhexidine group, were modest. Thus, the question as to what extent the combined mechanical/minocycline treatment could be considered adequate for the treated lesions remains to be answered. The present short-term findings, however, encourage further studies with longer observation intervals on adjunctive use of minocycline microspheres in the treatment of periimplant lesions. To evaluate the effect of irrigation with 0.06% chlorhexidine (PerioGard) (CHX) using a powered oral irrigator (Water Pik) with a special subgingival irrigating tip (Pik Pocket Subgingival Tip) compared to rinsing with 0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate once daily.
                Following a prophylaxis, patients were randomly assigned to an irrigation or a rinse group. The following clinical parameters were measured at baseline and at the 3-month end of the study: Modified Gingival Index (MGI), Plaque Index (PI), Bleeding Index (BI), and Calculus Index (CI). Also, a Stain Index (SI) was measured at 3 months.
                Patients irrigating with diluted CHX showed a statistically significant reduction (P < 0.05) from their baseline in the MGI, PI, BI, and CI scores at 3 months. In the rinse group both MGI and BI showed statistically significant reduction from their baseline (P < 0.05) at 3 months. The rinse group showed a nonsignificant (P > 0.05) increase from baseline in CI and a nonsignificant decrease in PI. Intergroup comparisons showed that CHX irrigation produced statistically significantly greater reductions than CHX rinsing in the PI, MGI, and SI. The irrigation group also showed a greater reduction in BI and CI than the rinsing group but these differences were not statistically significant (P = 0.12). The results of this study suggest that use of diluted 0.06% CHX when used in a powered irrigator may be a valuable adjunct to oral health in patients with implants. The purpose of this controlled prospective clinical study was to compare cemented and screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth crowns followed for 4 years following prosthetic rehabilitation with respect to peri-implant marginal bone levels, peri-implant soft tissue parameters, and prosthetic complications.
                Twelve consecutive patients were selected from a patient population attending the Implantology Department at the University of Padova. They all presented with single-tooth bilateral edentulous sites in the canine/premolar/molar region with adequate bone width, similar bone height at the implant sites, and an occlusal scheme that allowed for the establishment of identical occlusal cusp/fossa contacts. Each patient received 2 identical implants (1 in each edentulous site). One was randomly selected to be restored with a cemented implant-supported single-tooth crown, and the other was restored with a screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth crown. Data on peri-implant marginal bone levels and on soft tissue parameters were collected 4 years after implant placement and analyzed to determine whether there was a significant difference with respect to the method of retention (cemented versus screw-retained).
                All patients completed the study. All 24 implants survived, resulting in a cumulative implant success rate of 100%. Statistical analysis revealed no significant differences between the 2 groups with respect to peri-implant marginal bone levels and soft tissue parameters.
                The data obtained with this study suggested that the choice of cementation versus screw retention for single-tooth implant restorations is likely not based on clinical results but seems to be based primarily on the clinician's preference.
                Within the limitations of this study, the results indicate that there was no evidence of different behavior of the peri-implant marginal bone and of the peri-implant soft tissue when cemented or screw-retained single-tooth implant restorations were provided for this patient population.
There was only low quality evidence for which are the most effective interventions for maintaining or recovering health of peri-implant soft tissues. The included RCTs had short follow-up periods and few subjects and although overall the risk of bias of the studies was either low or unclear, only single trials were available for each outcome. There was no reliable evidence as to which regimens are most effective for long term maintenance. This should not be interpreted as meaning that current maintenance regimens are ineffective. There was weak evidence that antibacterial mouthrinses are effective in reducing plaque and marginal bleeding around implants. More RCTs should be conducted in this area. In particular, there is a definite need for trials powered to find possible differences, using primary outcome measures and with much longer follow up. Such trials should be reported according to the CONSORT guidelines (www.consort-statement.org/).