Study Year of
publication
Type of
study
Groups Treatment provided N
patients
N
implants
Follow-up
(months)
Diagnosis Treatment outcomes Microbiological
results
Conclusions
Self-
performed
Professionally-
delivered
Mucositis/
peri-implantitis
PDs reduction
Mean (SD),
mm
Radiographic
MBL
changes
Mean (SD),
mm
BOP changes
Mean (SD),
mm
Exudate
changes
PI or MPI (SD)
changes
CAL
Mean (SD),
mm
Recession
Mean (SD),
mm
Gomes et al. [29] 2015 Single-arm cohort Test Multi-tufted TB, dental floss and/or interdental TB.
Non-therapeutic fluoride toothpaste
Weekly supragingival/
supramucosal
MD for 1 month,
then every 3 months
14 59 13 Mucositis 3.62 (0.31)
to
2.55 (0.16)
NA Sites:
54.05 (5.88)
to
4.96 (1.78)%
NA 18.98 (5.89)
to
2.7 (1.47)%
/390 days
NA NA NA The supragingival-supramucosal biofilm control benefited both teeth and implants
Corbella et al. [30] 2011 Non-controlled prospective study Mucositis CHX 0.2% mouthwash twice a day for 10 days, interdental brushes Powered and manual devices MD 61 244 60 Mucositis 2.2 (0.87)
to
2.46 (0.5)
NA Sites:
Index 0: 88.2 to 100%
Index 1: 1.4 to 0%;
Index 2: 10.4 to 0%;
Index 3: 0 to 0%.
NA Sites/6 and 58 months
Index 0: 58.3% to 88.5%;
Index 1: 2.8 to 7.3%;
Index 2: 9.7 to 1%;
Index 3: 29.2 to 3.2%
NA NA NA Systematic hygienic protocol is effective in keeping low the incidence of peri-implant mucositis as well as in controlling plaque accumulation and clinical attachment loss.
Peri-implantitis CHX 0.2% mouthwash, interdental brushes Powered and manual devices
+ LD of CHX 1%
+ Sx MD
Peri-implantiti
Costa et al. [31] 2012 Prospective study Control No No 41 183 60 Mucositis 16.7% sites
with
PD ≥ 5 mm
41.5% implants show BL Sites:
50.2 to 62.6%
NA 1.6 (0.6)
to
1.9 (0.5)
% sites > 3 mm
CAL
14.9 (16.7)
to
22.7 (23.2)
NA NA The absence of preventive maintenance in individuals with pre-existing peri-implant mucositis was associated with a high incidence of peri-implantitis.
Test OHI At least 5 SC,
coronal prophylaxis
39 157 5.9% sites
with
PD ≥ 5 mm
17.9% implants show BL Sites:
41.7 to 33.3%
NA 1.4 (0.6)
to
1.4 (0.7)
% sites > 3 mm
CAL
15.9 (19)
to
20.1 (23)
NA NA
Deppe et al. [32] 2013 Prospective study Moderate bone loss OHI, plaque control with use of CHX solution (0.3%) Calculus removal
+ antimicrobial PDT
16 10 6 Peri-implantitis 3.3 (0.8)
to
2.9 (0.5)
3.9 (0.8)
to
3.6 (0.8) mm
Sulcus bleeding index:
1.8 (1.3)
to
1.1 (0.9)
NA NA 3.8 (1.3)
to
3.6 (0.7)
0.5 (0.5)
to
0.7 (0.4)
NA Non-surgical PDT could stop bone resorption in moderate peri-implant defects but not in severe defects. marginal tissue recession was not significantly different in both groups.
Severe bone lost 8 5.8 (0.8)
to
6.5 (0.9)
6.8 (0.8)
to
8.7 (0.7)
Sulcus bleeding index:
1.5 (1.2)
to
1.3 (1.1)
NA NA 6.7 (0.9)
to
8.1 (0.9)
0.9 (1.2)
to
1.6 (1.2)
NA
Schwarz et al. [33] 2015 Prospective case series MD + local antiseptic (MD + CHX) OHI Supragingival calculus removal and supramucosal/gingival professional implant/
tooth cleaning
+ MD + CHX
17 24 6 Mucositis 3.4 (0.5)
to
3.3 (0.5)
NA 46.3 (23.5)
to
8.3 (10.4)%
NA 0.7 (0.6)
to
0.4 (0.5)
NA NA NA Non-surgical treatment of either peri-implant mucositis using MD + CHX or peri-implantitis using laser therapy at zirconia implants was associated with significant short-term clinical improvements. A complete disease resolution, however, was not achieved in the majority of the patients.
Er:YAG laser therapy OHI Supragingival calculus removal
and supramucosal/
gingival professional implant/
tooth cleaning
+ laser tx
17 21 Peri-implantitis 5.5 (0.5)
to
4.5 (0.7)
NA 45 (18.5)
to
14.2 (11.6)%
NA 0.6 (0.3)
to
0.1 (0.1)
NA NA NA

ABX = antibiotics treatment; BOP = bleeding on probing; CAL = clinical attachment level; CHX = chlorhexidine digluconate; LD = local delivery; MBL = marginal bone level; MD = mechanical debridement; MPI = modified plaque index; NA = not available; PD = probing depth; PDT = photodynamic therapy; PI = plaque index; RB = radiographic bone; SD = standard deviation; Sx = surgery; TB = tooth brush.