These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Clinical evaluation of an Er:YAG laser for nonsurgical treatment of peri-implantitis: a pilot study.
    Author: Schwarz F, Sculean A, Rothamel D, Schwenzer K, Georg T, Becker J.
    Journal: Clin Oral Implants Res; 2005 Feb; 16(1):44-52. PubMed ID: 15642030.
    Abstract:
    The aim of this controlled, parallel design clinical study was to compare the effectiveness of an Er:YAG laser (ERL) to that of mechanical debridement using plastic curettes and antiseptic therapy for nonsurgical treatment of peri-implantitis. Twenty patients with moderate to advanced peri-implantitis lesions were randomly treated with either (1) an ERL using a cone-shaped glass fiber tip at an energy setting of 100 mJ/pulse and 10 pps (ERL), or (2) mechanical debridement using plastic curettes and antiseptic therapy with chlorhexidine digluconate (0.2%) (C). The following clinical parameters were measured at baseline, 3 and 6 months after treatment by one blinded and calibrated examiner: Plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), gingival recession (GR) and clinical attachment level (CAL). At the baseline examination, there were no statistically significant differences in any of the investigated parameters. Mean value of BOP decreased in the ERL group from 83% at baseline to 31% after 6 months (P < 0.001) and in the C group from 80% at baseline to 58% after 6 months (P < 0.001). The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P < 0.001, respectively). The sites treated with ERL demonstrated a mean CAL change from 5.8 +/- 1 mm at baseline to 5.1 +/- 1.1 mm (P < 0.01) after 6 months. The C sites demonstrated a mean CAL change from 6.2 +/- 1.5 mm at baseline to 5.6 +/- 1.6 mm (P < 0.001) after 6 months. After 6 months, the difference between the two groups was statistically not significant (P > 0.05). Within the limits of the present study, it was concluded that (i) at 6 months following treatment both therapies led to significant improvements of the investigated clinical parameters, and (ii) ERL resulted in a statistically significant higher reduction of BOP than C.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]