Nonsurgical treatment of moderate and advanced periimplantitis lesions: A controlled clinical study

148Citations
Citations of this article
179Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

The aim of this controlled, parallel design clinical study was to evaluate the effectiveness of an Er:YAG (erbium-doped:yttrium, aluminum, and garnet) laser for nonsurgical treatment of periimplantitis lesions. Twenty patients, each of whom displayed at least one implant with (a) moderate and (b) advanced periimplantitis (n=40 implants; IMZ, ITI, Spline Twist, ZL-Duraplant, Camlog), were randomly instrumented nonsurgically using either (1) an Er:YAG laser (100 mJ/pulse, 10 Hz) device (LAS) or (2) mechanical debridement using plastic curettes and antiseptic therapy with chlorhexidine digluconate (0.2%) (C). The following clinical parameters were measured at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months after treatment: plaque index, bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth, gingival recession, and clinical attachment level (CAL). Mean BOP improved significantly in both groups at 3, 6, and 12 months (a- lesions: P<0.001 and b- lesions: P<0.01, respectively). After 3 and 6 months, the mean reduction of BOP was significantly higher in the LAS group when compared to the C group (a- and b- lesions: P<0.01 and P<0.05, respectively). At 3 and 6 months, both groups revealed significant CAL gains at a- and b- lesions (P<0.01, respectively). In both groups, however, the mean CAL at a- and b- lesions was not significantly different from the respective baseline values at 12 months (P>0.05, respectively). Although treatment of periimplantitis lesions with LAS resulted in a significantly higher BOP reduction than C, its effectiveness seemed to be limited to a period of 6 months, particularly at b- lesions. © Springer-Verlag 2006.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Schwarz, F., Bieling, K., Bonsmann, M., Latz, T., & Becker, J. (2006). Nonsurgical treatment of moderate and advanced periimplantitis lesions: A controlled clinical study. Clinical Oral Investigations, 10(4), 279–288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-006-0070-3

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free