[vc_row][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_single_image image=”3438″ img_size=”870×500″][vc_column_text]
Abstract
Aim: To systematically assess the efficacy of patient-administered mechanical and/or chemical plaque control protocols in the management of peri-implant mucositis (PM).
Material and Methods: Randomized (RCTs) and Controlled Clinical Trials (CCTs) were identified through an electronic search of three databases complemented by manual search. Identification, screening, eligibility and inclusion of studies was performed independently by two reviewers. Studies without professional intervention or with only mechanical debridement professionally administered were included. Quality assessment was performed by means of the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias.
Results: Eleven RCTs with a follow-up from 3 to 24 months were included. Definition of PM was lacking or heterogeneously reported. Complete resolution of PM was not achieved in any study. One study reported 38% of patients with complete resolution of PM. Surrogate end-point outcomes of PM therapy were often reported. The choice of control interventions showed great variability. The efficacy of powered toothbrushes, a triclosan-containing toothpaste and adjunctive antiseptics remains to be established. High quality of methods and reporting was found in four studies.
Conclusions: Professionally- and patient-administered mechanical plaque control alone should be considered the standard of care in the management of PM. Therapy of PM is a prerequisite for the prevention of peri-implantitis.
Key words: chemical plaque control; dental implants; mechanical plaque control; peri-implant diseases; peri-implant mucositis; prevention
[real3dflipbook id=”13″]
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/4″][stm_sidebar sidebar=”1742″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
