Treatment of peri-implantitis using an Er:YAG laser or an air-abrasive device

Stefan Renvert; Christel Lindahl; Ann-Marie Roos Jansåker; G. Rutger Persson

doi:10.1111/j.1600-051X.2010.01646.x

Treatment of peri-implantitis using an Er:YAG laser or an air-abrasive device

Stefan Renvert, Christel Lindahl, Ann-Marie Roos Jansåker, G. Rutger Persson

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

140 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background

Non-surgical peri-implantitis therapies appear to be ineffective. Limited data suggest that ER:YAG laser therapy improves clinical conditions. The present study aimed at comparing the treatment effects between air-abrasive (AM) and Er:YAG laser (LM) mono-therapy in cases with severe peri-implantitis.

Materials and methods

Twenty-one subjects in each group were randomly assigned to one time intervention by an air-abrasive device or an Er:YAG laser. Clinical data were collected before treatment and at 6 months. Data analysis was performed using repeat univariate analysis of variance controlling for subject factors.

Results

No baseline subject characteristic differences were found. Bleeding on probing and suppuration decreased in both the groups (p < 0.001). The mean probing depth (PPD) reductions in the AM and LM groups were 0.9 mm (SD 0.8) and 0.8 mm (SD +/- 0.5), with mean bone-level changes (loss) of -0.1 mm (SD +/- 0.8) and -0.3 mm (SD +/- 0.9), respectively (NS). A positive treatment outcome, PPD reduction >= 0.5 mm and gain or no loss of bone were found in 47% and 44% in the AM and LM groups, respectively.

Conclusions

The clinical treatment results were limited and similar between the two methods compared with those in cases with severe peri-implantitis.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	65-73
Number of pages	8
Journal	Journal of Clinical Periodontology
Volume	38
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2010.01646.x
Publication status	Published - 2011

Swedish Standard Keywords

Dentistry (30216)

Keywords

14-year
air-abrasive
bone loss
er-yag laser
follow-up
implants
intervention
keratinized mucosa
laser
mechanical nonsurgical treatment
non-surgical
peri-implantitis
subgingival plaque removal
titanium

Access to Document

10.1111/j.1600-051X.2010.01646.x

Cite this

@article{b6bc7540a68e45fd83a2010f9075c1e5,

title = "Treatment of peri-implantitis using an Er:YAG laser or an air-abrasive device",

abstract = "Background Non-surgical peri-implantitis therapies appear to be ineffective. Limited data suggest that ER:YAG laser therapy improves clinical conditions. The present study aimed at comparing the treatment effects between air-abrasive (AM) and Er:YAG laser (LM) mono-therapy in cases with severe peri-implantitis. Materials and methods Twenty-one subjects in each group were randomly assigned to one time intervention by an air-abrasive device or an Er:YAG laser. Clinical data were collected before treatment and at 6 months. Data analysis was performed using repeat univariate analysis of variance controlling for subject factors. Results No baseline subject characteristic differences were found. Bleeding on probing and suppuration decreased in both the groups (p < 0.001). The mean probing depth (PPD) reductions in the AM and LM groups were 0.9 mm (SD 0.8) and 0.8 mm (SD +/- 0.5), with mean bone-level changes (loss) of -0.1 mm (SD +/- 0.8) and -0.3 mm (SD +/- 0.9), respectively (NS). A positive treatment outcome, PPD reduction >= 0.5 mm and gain or no loss of bone were found in 47% and 44% in the AM and LM groups, respectively. Conclusions The clinical treatment results were limited and similar between the two methods compared with those in cases with severe peri-implantitis.",

keywords = "14-year, air-abrasive, bone loss, er-yag laser, follow-up, implants, intervention, keratinized mucosa, laser, mechanical nonsurgical treatment, non-surgical, peri-implantitis, subgingival plaque removal, titanium",

author = "Stefan Renvert and Christel Lindahl and {Roos Jans{\aa}ker}, Ann-Marie and Persson, {G. Rutger}",

year = "2011",

doi = "10.1111/j.1600-051X.2010.01646.x",

language = "English",

volume = "38",

pages = "65--73",

journal = "Journal of Clinical Periodontology",

issn = "0303-6979",

publisher = "Blackwell Munksgaard",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Treatment of peri-implantitis using an Er:YAG laser or an air-abrasive device

AU - Renvert, Stefan

AU - Lindahl, Christel

AU - Roos Jansåker, Ann-Marie

AU - Persson, G. Rutger

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - Background Non-surgical peri-implantitis therapies appear to be ineffective. Limited data suggest that ER:YAG laser therapy improves clinical conditions. The present study aimed at comparing the treatment effects between air-abrasive (AM) and Er:YAG laser (LM) mono-therapy in cases with severe peri-implantitis. Materials and methods Twenty-one subjects in each group were randomly assigned to one time intervention by an air-abrasive device or an Er:YAG laser. Clinical data were collected before treatment and at 6 months. Data analysis was performed using repeat univariate analysis of variance controlling for subject factors. Results No baseline subject characteristic differences were found. Bleeding on probing and suppuration decreased in both the groups (p < 0.001). The mean probing depth (PPD) reductions in the AM and LM groups were 0.9 mm (SD 0.8) and 0.8 mm (SD +/- 0.5), with mean bone-level changes (loss) of -0.1 mm (SD +/- 0.8) and -0.3 mm (SD +/- 0.9), respectively (NS). A positive treatment outcome, PPD reduction >= 0.5 mm and gain or no loss of bone were found in 47% and 44% in the AM and LM groups, respectively. Conclusions The clinical treatment results were limited and similar between the two methods compared with those in cases with severe peri-implantitis.

AB - Background Non-surgical peri-implantitis therapies appear to be ineffective. Limited data suggest that ER:YAG laser therapy improves clinical conditions. The present study aimed at comparing the treatment effects between air-abrasive (AM) and Er:YAG laser (LM) mono-therapy in cases with severe peri-implantitis. Materials and methods Twenty-one subjects in each group were randomly assigned to one time intervention by an air-abrasive device or an Er:YAG laser. Clinical data were collected before treatment and at 6 months. Data analysis was performed using repeat univariate analysis of variance controlling for subject factors. Results No baseline subject characteristic differences were found. Bleeding on probing and suppuration decreased in both the groups (p < 0.001). The mean probing depth (PPD) reductions in the AM and LM groups were 0.9 mm (SD 0.8) and 0.8 mm (SD +/- 0.5), with mean bone-level changes (loss) of -0.1 mm (SD +/- 0.8) and -0.3 mm (SD +/- 0.9), respectively (NS). A positive treatment outcome, PPD reduction >= 0.5 mm and gain or no loss of bone were found in 47% and 44% in the AM and LM groups, respectively. Conclusions The clinical treatment results were limited and similar between the two methods compared with those in cases with severe peri-implantitis.

KW - 14-year

KW - air-abrasive

KW - bone loss

KW - er-yag laser

KW - follow-up

KW - implants

KW - intervention

KW - keratinized mucosa

KW - laser

KW - mechanical nonsurgical treatment

KW - non-surgical

KW - peri-implantitis

KW - subgingival plaque removal

KW - titanium

U2 - 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2010.01646.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2010.01646.x

M3 - Article

SN - 0303-6979

VL - 38

SP - 65

EP - 73

JO - Journal of Clinical Periodontology

JF - Journal of Clinical Periodontology

IS - 1

ER -

Treatment of peri-implantitis using an Er:YAG laser or an air-abrasive device

Abstract

Swedish Standard Keywords

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this