Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Interventions for replacing missing teeth: treatment of perimplantitis

Esta versión no es la más reciente

Contraer todo Desplegar todo

Referencias

References to studies included in this review

Tang 2002 {published data only}

Tang Z, Cao C, Sha Y, Lin Y, Wang X. Effects of non‐surgical treatment modalities on peri‐implantitis. Chinese Journal of Stomatology 2002;37(3):173‐5.

References to studies excluded from this review

Bach 2000 {published data only}

Bach G, Neckel C, Mall C, Krekeler G. Conventional versus laser‐assisted therapy of periimplantitis: a five‐year comparative study. Implant Dentistry 2000;9(3):247‐51.

Brånemark 1977

Brånemark PI, Hansson BO, Adell R, Breine U, Lindstrom J, Hallen O, et al. Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10‐year period. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell Int, 1977.

Esposito 1999

Esposito M, Hirsch J‐M, Lekholm U, Thomsen P. Differential diagnosis and treatment strategies for biologic complications and failing oral implants: a review of the literature. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants 1999;14(4):473‐90.

Esposito 2004

Esposito M, Worthington HV, Thomsen P, Coulthard P. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: different types of dental implants. The Cochrane Library 2004, Issue 2.

Follmann 1992

Follmann D, Elliott P, Suh I, Cutler J. Variance imputation for overviews of clinical trials with continuous response. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1992;45(7):769‐73.

Haas 2000

Haas R, Baron M, Dörtbudak O, Watzek G. Lethal photosensitization, autogenous bone, and e‐PTFE membrane for the treatment of peri‐implantitis: preliminary results. The International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants 2000;15(3):374‐82.

Isidor 1996

Isidor F. Loss of osseointegration caused by occlusal load of oral implants. A clinical and radiographic study in monkeys. Clinical Oral Implants Research 1996;7(2):143‐52.

Leonhardt 2003

Leonhardt A, Dahlen G, Renvert S. Five‐year clinical, microbiological, and radiological outcome following treatment of peri‐implantitis in man. Journal of Periodontology 2003;74(10):1415‐22.

Mombelli 1992

Mombelli A, Lang NP. Antimicrobial treatment of peri‐implant infections. Clinical Oral Implants Research 1992;3(4):162‐8.

Mombelli 1999

Mombelli A. Prevention and therapy of peri‐implant infections. Proceedings of the 3rd European Workshop on Periodontology. Implant Dentistry. Berlin, Germany: Quintessence Publishing Co., Inc, 1999:281‐303.

Mombelli 2001

Mombelli A, Feloutzis A, Bragger U, Lang NP. Treatment of peri‐implantitis by local delivery of tetracycline. Clinical, microbiological and radiological results. Clinical Oral Implants Research 2001;12(4):287‐94.

Pontoriero 1994

Pontoriero R, Tonelli MP, Carnevale G, Mombelli A, Nyman SR, Lang NP. Experimentally induced peri‐implant mucositis. A clinical study in humans. Clinical Oral Implants Research 1994;5(4):254‐9.

References to other published versions of this review

Esposito 2002

Esposito M, Worthington HV, Coulthard P, Jokstad A. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: maintaining and re‐establishing healthy tissues around dental implants. The Cochrane Library 2002, Issue 3.

Esposito 2003

Esposito M, Worthington HV, Coulthard P, Thomsen P. Maintaining and re‐establishing health aroud osseointegrated oral implants: a Cochrane systematic review comparing the efficacy of various treatments. Periodontology 2000 2003;33:204‐12.

Characteristics of studies

Characteristics of included studies [ordered by study ID]

Tang 2002

Methods

Twelve week follow up, randomised, parallel group study. Unclear whether outcome assessors were blinded. Three withdrawals at 12 weeks for unknown reasons, 1 from the metronidazole group and 2 from the ultrasonic debridement group.

Participants

Patients in good general health having 1 stable implant affected by perimplantitis (bleeding on probing; PPD equal to or < 6 mm; bone loss < 4 mm). Exclusion criteria were assumption of antibiotics over the last 3 months and antimicrobial mouthwashes over the last month. Adults treated at the Centre for Dental Implantation, Peking University, China. Thirty enrolled (15 patients in each group) and results given for 27.

Interventions

Metronidazole gel 25% injected into the pocket at a depth of 3 mm versus ultrasonic debridement with carbon fiber tip inserted 1 to 2 mm into the gingival sulcus at the lowest power for 15 seconds around IMZ or Frialit‐2 implants. Both interventions were repeated a second time 1 week after.

Outcomes

Probing pocket depth, bleeding on probing, plaque index, BANA test for bacterial quantification (Periochek, Sunstar, Japan) and side effects at 1, 2, 6 and 12 weeks. Twelve weeks data used. We could not calculate change data as the standard deviations for these were not present.

Notes

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

B ‐ Unclear

PPD = probing pocket depth

Characteristics of excluded studies [ordered by study ID]

Study

Reason for exclusion

Bach 2000

No data presented. Written to authors but no reply.

Data and analyses

Open in table viewer
Comparison 1. Metronidazole gel versus ultrasonic debridement

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Probing pocket depth at 12 weeks Show forest plot

1

27

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.10 [‐0.59, 0.79]

Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Metronidazole gel versus ultrasonic debridement, Outcome 1 Probing pocket depth at 12 weeks.

Comparison 1 Metronidazole gel versus ultrasonic debridement, Outcome 1 Probing pocket depth at 12 weeks.

Comparison 1 Metronidazole gel versus ultrasonic debridement, Outcome 1 Probing pocket depth at 12 weeks.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Metronidazole gel versus ultrasonic debridement, Outcome 1 Probing pocket depth at 12 weeks.

Table 1. Results of quality assessment after correspondence with authors

Study

Allocation

Blinding of assessor

Withdrawals

Grade

Tang 2003

(B) Unclear

(B) Unclear

(B) Unclear

C

Figuras y tablas -
Table 1. Results of quality assessment after correspondence with authors
Comparison 1. Metronidazole gel versus ultrasonic debridement

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Probing pocket depth at 12 weeks Show forest plot

1

27

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.10 [‐0.59, 0.79]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Metronidazole gel versus ultrasonic debridement