| Title |
A novel non-surgical method for mild peri-implantitis- a multicenter consecutive case series
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Implant Dentistry, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40729-017-0098-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
J. C. Wohlfahrt, B. J. Evensen, B. Zeza, H. Jansson, A. Pilloni, A. M. Roos-Jansåker, G. L. Di Tanna, A. M. Aass, M. Klepp, O. C. Koldsland |
| Abstract |
The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect on peri-implant mucosal inflammation from the use of a novel instrument made of chitosan in the non-surgical treatment of mild peri-implantitis across several clinical centers. In this 6-month multicenter prospective consecutive case series performed in six different periodontal specialist clinics, 63 implants in 63 patients were finally included. The subjects had mild peri-implantitis defined as radiographic bone loss of 1-2 mm, pocket probing depth (PPD) ≥4 mm and a positive bleeding on probing (mBoP) score. The patients were clinically examined at baseline and after 2, 4, 12 and 24 weeks, and radiographs were taken at baseline and at 3 and 6 months. Treatment of the implants with the chitosan brush seated in an oscillating dental drill piece was performed at baseline and at 3 months. Reductions in the clinical parameters (PPD and mBoP) were compared between baseline and the later examination time points. Significant reductions in both PPD and mBoP were observed at all time points compared with the baseline clinical measurements (p < 0.001). The mean PPD and mBoP at baseline were 5.15 mm (4.97; 5.32) and 1.86 (1.78; 1.93), respectively, whereas the mean PPD and mBoP at 6 months were 4.0 mm (3.91; 4.19) and 0.64 (0.54; 0.75), respectively. Stable reductions in PPD and mBoP were evident up to 6 months after the initial treatment and 3 months after the second treatment. All 63 implants were reported to have stable radiographic levels of osseous support. This case series demonstrated that an oscillating chitosan brush is safe to use and seems to have merits in the non-surgical treatment of dental implants with mild peri-implantitis. To measure the effectiveness of the method, a multicenter randomized clinical trial needs to be undertaken. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 11% |
| Unspecified | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 15 | 27% |
| Unknown | 10 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 45% |
| Unspecified | 5 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 5% |
| Materials Science | 2 | 4% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 12 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 February 2018.
All research outputs
#18,587,406
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Implant Dentistry
#57
of 103 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#243,216
of 317,584 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Implant Dentistry
#7
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 103 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.8. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,584 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.