Results : Implant decontamination with phosphoric acid (1)
Results
The progress of patients throughout the different phases of the study is illustrated in Fig. 1. Table 1 depicts the baseline demographic patient and implant characteristics. The included patients had a total of 128 implants of which 53 implants showed signs of peri-implantitis. Different implant brands and types with different implant surfaces were present, including Straumann (Straumann AG, Basel, Switserland; SLA® and SLActive® surface), Nobel Biocare (Nobel Biocare AB, Göteborg, Sweden; TiUnite® surface), Biomet 3i (Biomet Inc., Warsaw, Indiana, USA; OSSEOTITE® surface), Frialit-2, (Dentsply Friadent, Mannheim, Germany; FRIADENT® plus surface), and Pitt-Easy (Sybron Implant Solutions GmbH, Bremen, Germany; Puretex® surface). Three patients with each one implant with peri-implantitis were lost to follow-up (2 patients from the control group, 1 from the test group).
Microbiological outcomes
10Log-transformed mean bacterial anaerobic counts of the culture-positive implants for the control and test group before and after debridement and decontamination of the implant surface during the surgical procedure are depicted in Table 2. In both groups, the debridement and decontamination procedure resulted in a significant immediate reduction in counts of anaerobic bacteria on the implant surface. Although the reduction in total anaerobic load was greater in the test group, the difference did not reach the level of statistical significance (p = 0.108). However, in the test group, the total anaerobic load was significantly more often reduced below detection level than in the control group (20 out of 23 in the test group, 10 out of 17 in the control group, p = 0.042). No significant differences were observed in the 10Log-transformed mean bacterial anaerobic counts of the peri-implant sulcus, neither between control and test group nor between baseline and 3 months after surgery (Table 3).
Serial posts:
- Implant decontamination with phosphoric acid
- Background : Implant decontamination with phosphoric acid
- Methods : Implant decontamination with phosphoric acid
- Interventions : Implant decontamination with phosphoric acid
- Outcomes : Implant decontamination with phosphoric acid
- Randomization : Implant decontamination with phosphoric acid
- Statistical analysis : Implant decontamination with phosphoric acid
- Results : Implant decontamination with phosphoric acid (1)
- Results : Implant decontamination with phosphoric acid (2)
- Discussion : Implant decontamination with phosphoric acid (1)
- Discussion : Implant decontamination with phosphoric acid (2)
- Discussion : Implant decontamination with phosphoric acid (3)
- References : Implant decontamination with phosphoric acid
- Table 1 Characteristics of included patients/implants
- Table 2 Log-transformed mean bacterial anaerobic counts
- Table 3 Log-transformed mean bacterial anaerobic counts
- Table 4 Descriptive statistics of clinical parameters
- Table 5 Average differences in BoP, SoP, and PPD between the control and test group at 3-month follow-up
- Figure 1. Flow diagram