Efficacy of mechanical/physical approaches for implant surface decontamination in non-surgical submarginal instrumentation of peri-implantitis. A systematic review

AimTo evaluate the efficacy of non-surgical submarginal peri-implant instrumentation with mechanical/physical decontamination compared to non-surgical submarginal instrumentation alone or with placebo decontamination in patients with peri-implantitis. Materials and MethodsThree focused questions were addressed, and a systematic search for randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials, and prospective cohort studies with definitions of peri-implantitis and a minimal follow-up of 6 months was conducted. The main outcome variables were reduction in pocket probing depth (PD) and bleeding on probing (BOP). Suppuration on probing, marginal peri-implant bone level changes, patient-related outcomes and adverse events, implant survival, treatment success, and disease resolution were assessed as secondary outcomes. ResultsOut of 239 findings, full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, and 9 (n = 9 RCTs) were included in the present review. Five studies evaluated the effects of various laser types, and in four studies efficacy of air-abrasive mechanisms and of a novel ultrasonic device was determined. At 6 months, PD reductions were observed in nine studies but only Er, Cr:YSGG laser-treated group showed statistically significant higher reductions compared to the control group. BOP was statistically significantly reduced at 6 months in two studies following the application of Er:YAG laser compared to controls. One study reported statistically significant reduction in BOP following application of air-polishing device compared to control treatment. No statistically significant differences between treatment groups were reported for the secondary outcome variables. Owing to the large heterogeneity of study designs, no meta-analysis was performed. ConclusionsAvailable evidence on the efficacy of non-surgical submarginal peri-implant instrumentation with mechanical/physical decontamination is limited by the small number of controlled studies and the high heterogeneity of study protocols. Clinical and patient-reported benefits remain to be demonstrated.

Automated summary

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of non-surgical submarginal peri-implant instrumentation with mechanical/physical decontamination compared to non-surgical submarginal instrumentation alone or with placebo decontamination in patients with peri-implantitis. The available evidence is limited by the small number of controlled studies and the high heterogeneity of study protocols, and the clinical and patient-reported benefits remain to be demonstrated.