Int J Implant Dent. 2017 Dec;3(1):33. doi: 10.1186/s40729-017-0091-5. Epub 2017 Jul 17.
Implant decontamination with phosphoric acid during surgical peri-implantitis treatment: a RCT.
International journal of implant dentistry
Diederik F M Hentenaar, Yvonne C M De Waal, Hans Strooker, Henny J A Meijer, Arie-Jan Van Winkelhoff, Gerry M Raghoebar
Affiliations
Affiliations
- Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, PO Box 30.001, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands.
- Center for Dentistry and Oral Hygiene, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
- Department of Medical Microbiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
- Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, PO Box 30.001, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands. [email protected].
PMID: 28718012
PMCID: PMC5514004 DOI: 10.1186/s40729-017-0091-5
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Peri-implantitis is known as an infectious disease that affects the peri-implant soft and hard tissue. Today, scientific literature provides very little evidence for an effective intervention protocol for treatment of peri-implantitis. The aim of the present randomized controlled trial is to evaluate the microbiological and clinical effectiveness of phosphoric acid as a decontaminating agent of the implant surface during surgical peri-implantitis treatment.
METHODS: Peri-implantitis lesions were treated with resective surgical treatment aimed at peri-implant granulation tissue removal, bone recontouring, and pocket elimination. Fifty-three implant surfaces in 28 patients were mechanically cleaned and treated with either 35% phosphoric etching gel (test group) or sterile saline (control group). Microbiological samples were obtained during surgery; clinical parameters were recorded at baseline and at 3 months after treatment. Data were analyzed using multi-variable linear regression analysis and multilevel statistics.
RESULTS: Significant immediate reductions in total anaerobic bacterial counts on the implant surface were found in both groups. Immediate reduction was greater when phosphoric acid was used. The difference in log-transformed mean anaerobic counts between both procedures was not statistical significant (p = 0.108), but there were significantly less culture-positive implants after the decontamination procedure in the phosphoric acid group (p = 0.042). At 3 months post-surgery, 75% of the implants in the control group and 63.3% of the implants in the test group showed disease resolution. However, no significant differences in clinical and microbiological outcomes between both groups were found.
CONCLUSIONS: The application of 35% phosphoric acid after mechanical debridement is superior to mechanical debridement combined with sterile saline rinsing for decontamination of the implant surface during surgical peri-implantitis treatment. However, phosphoric acid as implant surface decontaminant does not seem to enhance clinical outcomes on a 3-month follow-up.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands National Trial Register, NTR5185 (www.trialregister.nl).
Keywords: Decontamination; Dental implants; Microbiology; Peri-implantitis; Surgery
References
- J Clin Periodontol. 2011 Mar;38 Suppl 11:178-81 - PubMed
- J Clin Periodontol. 2016 Apr;43(4):383-8 - PubMed
- Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012 Jun;14(3):421-7 - PubMed
- J Clin Periodontol. 2015 May;42(5):462-9 - PubMed
- PLoS One. 2013 Jun 07;8(6):e66052 - PubMed
- Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012 Feb;23(2):205-10 - PubMed
- Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016 Dec;27(12 ):1485-1491 - PubMed
- Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1998 Nov-Dec;13(6):845-50 - PubMed
- Eur J Oral Implantol. 2012;5 Suppl:S21-41 - PubMed
- J Clin Periodontol. 2015 Apr;42 Suppl 16:S158-71 - PubMed
- Quintessence Int. 2016 Apr;47(4):293-6 - PubMed
- Implant Dent. 1992 Summer;1(2):154-8 - PubMed
- J Clin Periodontol. 2008 Sep;35(8 Suppl):282-5 - PubMed
- Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016 Mar;27(3):329-40 - PubMed
- Eur J Oral Implantol. 2012;5 Suppl:S71-81 - PubMed
- Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2012 Sep-Oct;27(5):1043-54 - PubMed
- Clin Oral Implants Res. 2003 Aug;14(4):373-80 - PubMed
- J Oral Maxillofac Res. 2016 Sep 9;7(3):e14 - PubMed
- Int J Mol Sci. 2016 Jul 19;17 (7): - PubMed
- Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013 Nov;24(11):1238-46 - PubMed
- Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014 Oct;25(10):1149-60 - PubMed
- Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011 Nov;22(11):1214-20 - PubMed
- Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015 Sep;26(9):1015-23 - PubMed
- Ann Periodontol. 1996 Nov;1(1):879-925 - PubMed
- J Periodontol. 2016 Jul;87(7):809-19 - PubMed
- Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008 Feb;19(2):182-7 - PubMed
- Clin Oral Implants Res. 2010 Aug;21(8):866-72 - PubMed
- Appl Microbiol. 1972 Oct;24(4):638-44 - PubMed
- J Periodontol. 2016 Aug;87(8):953-61 - PubMed
- Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2012 Mar-Apr;27(2):401-10 - PubMed
- J Periodontol. 1994 Oct;65(10):942-8 - PubMed
- Clin Oral Implants Res. 2000 Apr;11(2):93-8 - PubMed
- Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014 Mar;25(3):279-87 - PubMed
- Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009 Jan;20(1):99-108 - PubMed
- J Periodontal Res. 1984 Mar;19(2):168-76 - PubMed
- Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011 Jul;22(7):681-90 - PubMed
- J Clin Periodontol. 2013 Feb;40(2):186-95 - PubMed
- J Clin Microbiol. 1985 Jul;22(1):75-9 - PubMed
- J Periodontol. 2003 Oct;74(10 ):1415-22 - PubMed
Publication Types