4.0 Article

Efficacy of Antibiotic Versus Probiotics As Adjuncts to Mechanical Debridement for the Treatment of Peri-Implant Mucositis

Journal

JOURNAL OF ORAL IMPLANTOLOGY
Volume 48, Issue 2, Pages 99-104

Publisher

ALLEN PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1563/aaid-joi-D-20-00259

Keywords

antibiotics; bleeding on probing; crestal bone loss; dental implant; peri-implant mucositis; probing depth

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study compared the efficacy of probiotic therapy and antibiotic therapy as adjuvants to non-surgical mechanical debridement for the treatment of peri-implant mucositis. The results showed that therapy with probiotics was more effective than therapy with antibiotics for short-term treatment.
The objective was to compare the efficiency of probiotic therapy (PT) vs antibiotic therapy (AT) as adjuvants to nonsurgical-mechanical debridement (NSMD) for the treatment of peri-implant mucositis (Pi-M). Volunteers with Pi-M were encompassed. Therapeutically, patients were randomly divided into 3 groups: (a) Group 1: NSMD + PT; (b) Group 2: NSMD +AT; and (c) Group 3: NSMD alone. Peri-implant plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), and crestal bone loss (CBL) were recorded at baseline and at 3 and 6 months follow-up. P < .05 was selected as the indicator of statistical significance. Forty-two male individuals (14, 14, and 14 in Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively) were included. At 3 and 6 months of follow-up, PI (P < .01), BOP (P < .01), and PD (P < .01) were higher in Group 2 than Group 1. At 3 months of follow-up, PI (P < .01), BOP (P < .01), and PD (P < .01) were higher in Group 3 than Group 2. At 6 months of follow-up, PI, BOP, and PD were comparable in Groups 2 and 3. In Group 3, PI, BOP, and PD were comparable with the respective baseline values at 6 months of follow-up. The CBL in all groups remained unchanged up to 6 months of follow-up. The NSMD with adjuvant PT is more effective than adjunct AT for the treatment of Pi-M for up to 3 months.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available