1. Erythritol powder airflow for the treatment of peri-implant mucositis: A randomized controlled clinical trial.
- Author
-
Corbella S, Radaelli K, Alberti A, Francetti L, and Taschieri S
- Subjects
- Humans, Male, Female, Middle Aged, Biofilms drug effects, Treatment Outcome, Aged, Periodontal Index, Anti-Infective Agents, Local therapeutic use, Anti-Infective Agents, Local administration & dosage, Dental Implants adverse effects, Dental Plaque Index, Air Abrasion, Dental methods, Adult, Dental Calculus therapy, Erythritol therapeutic use, Erythritol administration & dosage, Chlorhexidine therapeutic use, Chlorhexidine administration & dosage, Powders, Peri-Implantitis drug therapy
- Abstract
Objectives: Peri-implant mucositis is a biofilm-related, reversible inflammatory disease that can evolve into peri-implantitis if not adequately treated. The aim of the present randomized controlled clinical trial was to evaluate the efficacy of air-abrasive powder as compared to chlorhexidine (CHX) for the treatment of peri-implant mucositis, in terms of clinical and patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) and occurrence of peri-implantitis 12 months after treatment., Methods: In the control group, full-mouth calculus and plaque removal was performed with ultrasound and manual devices, and a 1.0% CHX gel was applied; in the test group, supra- and subgingival biofilm removal was performed using erythritol powder with a dedicated nozzle and calculus removal was performed with ultrasonic instruments if needed. Bleeding and plaque indexes, peri-implant probing depth and tissue level were measured at 1 week, and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after treatment, while PROMs were evaluated up to 7 days after treatment., Results: Among 80 included implants, 70 were analysed at 12 months follow-up (30 in the test group, 40 in the control group, and 20 subjects). Success rates (implant-level) in terms of bleeding index were significantly different between the test (96.7%) and control group (92.5%); as for PROMs, only taste sensation was significantly better in the test group. The test group was significantly correlated to the smallest changes in peri-implant probing depth between baseline and 3 months., Conclusions: The study showed that both treatment strategies are effective. This suggests that the use of air-abrasive powders could be used as an alternative biofilm removal method instead of adjunctive treatments with antiseptics., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF