Study Year of
publication 		Type of
study 		Implant
surface 		Treatment method used Sample size Smokers Follow-up
(months) 		PD changes
Mean (SD) 		BOP changes
Mean (SD) 		Radiographic marginal bone level changes/bone defect fill Comments
Heitz-Mayfield et al. [16] 2012 Prospective
cohort study 		36 implants,
rough 		Open flap debridement and implant surface decontamination with saline and with adjunctive systemic amoxicillin and metronidazole 24 patients; mean age 56 0.25 12 Baseline:
mean PD ≥ 6 mm: 20%;
5 ≤ PD < 6 mm: 25%;
4 ≤ PD < 5 mm: 28%;
< 4 mm: 7%.
After 12 months:
≥ 6 mm: 0%;
5 ≤ PD < 6 mm: 0%;
4 ≤ PD < 5 mm: 11%;
< 4 mm: 89%.
Statistically significant (P < 0.01) reduction in mean PD. 		Number of sites with BOP:
- baseline: 2.5 (1);
- after 12 months: 1 (1.2).
Statistically significant (P < 0.01) reduction in BOP. 		Three implants in 3 patients had 0.6 - 1 mm bone loss at 12 months.
Three implants in 3 patients showed bone gain, while the remaining implants had stable marginal bone levels. 		Access flap surgery in combination with systemic antibiotics was an effective treatment resulting in significantly reduced BOP and PD scores.
Papadopoulos et al. [17] 2015 Randomized
controlled clinical study 		Not known Group 1: open flap debridement alone.
Group 2: open flap debridement with the additional use of a diode laser for the treatment of peri-implantitis. 		16: age 55. (40 - 73)
Group 1: 8
Group 2: 8 		Not known 6 Group 1:
- baseline mean PD 5.92 mm;
- after 6 months 4.44 mm;
- reduction of 1.38 mm.
Group 2:
- baseline mean PD 5.52 mm;
- after 6 months 4.31 mm;
- reduction of 1.19 mm.
No statistically significant difference between the 2 groups. 		Group 1:
- baseline 93.5%;
- after 6 months 31.3%;
- mean reduction 72.9%.
Group 2:
- baseline 81.2%;
- after 6 months 23.8%;
- mean reduction 66.7% (P < 0.05).
No statistically significant difference between groups. 		Surgical treatment of peri-implantitis by access flap surgery resulted in improvement of clinical parameters.
The additional use of a diode laser did not have any extra beneficial effect.
de Waal et al. [21] 2013 Retrospective
clinical study 		79 implants, rough Resective surgery with bone recontouring and surface decontamination.
Group 1: 0.12% CHX + 0.05% CPC.
Group 2: placebo. 		30:
Group : 15
age 61.5
Group 2: 15
age 59.4 		46.7 12 Mean PD ≥5 mm:
Group 1:
- baseline 88.2 (18.4)%;
- after 12 months 733.9 (39)%.
Group 2:
- baseline 75.2 (26.1)%;
- after 12 months 17.1 (24)% 		Group 1:
- baseline 87.1 (27)%;
- after 12 months 25.8 (8)%.
Group 2:
- baseline 81.3 (39)%;
- after 12 months 15.8 (6)%. 		Mean MBL:
Group 1:
- baseline 4.3 (2.1) mm;
- after 12 months 5 (2.5) mm.
Group 2:
- baseline 3.61 (1.9) mm;
- after 12 months 3.9 (2) mm. 		Improved clinical parameters (eg, BOP and PD) and MBL compared with the baseline were observed in both groups, with no significant difference between them.
Mean PD ≥ 6 mm:
Group 1:
- baseline 54.5 (33.7)%;
- after 12 months 17.7 (34.3)%.
Group 2:
- baseline 46.9 (33.7)%;
- after 12 months 17.2 (19.2)%.
Romeo et al. [22] 2005 Randomized
clinical study 		35 implants, rough Group 1 (test): resective surgery and modification of surface topography (implantoplasty).
Group 2: resective surgery only (control group). 		17:
Group 1: 10
Group 2: 7 		29 36 Group 1:
- baseline 5.79 (1.69) mm;
- after 36 months 3.21 (0.56) mm
(Student's t-value of +11.63).
Group 2:
- baseline 6.52 (1.62) mm;
- after 24 months 5.5 (1.47) mm
(Student's t-value of +3.18). 		Mean bleeding index:
Group 1:
- baseline 2.83 (0.47);
- after 36 months 0.61 (0.67)
(Student's t-value of +16.02).
Group 2:
- baseline 2.86 (0.35);
- after 24 months 2.33 (0.75)
(Student's t-value of +3.33). 		Clinical parameters improved in both treatment groups, without a significant difference between them.
Romeo et al. [23] 2007 Randomized
clinical study 		38 implants, rough Group 1 (test): resective surgery and implantoplasty.
Group 2 (control): resective surgery alone. 		19:
Group 1: 10
Group 2: 9 		Not reported 36 Group 1:
- baseline mesially 3.82 (1.52) mm, distally 3.94 (1.64) mm;
- after 3 years mesially 3.81 (3.94) mm, distally 1.72 (1.79) mm.
Group 2:
- baseline mesially 3.45 (1.93) mm, distally 3.49 (1.8) mm;
- after 3 years mesially 5.35 (1.99) mm, distally 5.42 (1.91) mm
Significantly higher (P < 0.05) mean MBL was recorded in group 2 than in group 1. 		A significantly extended MBL was reported in the group without implantoplasty.
de Waal et al. [29] 2015 Retrospective
clinical study 		108 implants,
rough 		Resective surgery with bone recontouring and surface decontamination.
Group 1: 0.2% chlorheksidine solution.
Group 2: 0.12% CHX + 0.05% CPC. 		44:
Group 1: 22 age 60.5
Group 2: 22 age 58.6 		59.1 12 Mean PD ≥ 5 mm:
Group 1:
- baseline 57.5 (26.6)%;
- after 12 months 7.3 (12.6)%.
Group 2:
- baseline 60.2 (28.3)%;
- after 12 months 5.3 (12.5)%. 		Group 1:
- baseline 82.1 (23.9)%;
- after 12 months 42.7 (34.2)%.
Group 2:
- baseline 74.2 (27.8)%;
- after 12 months 37.0 (35.3)%.
No significant difference between the groups
(P = 0.6). 		Mean MBL:
Group 1:
- baseline 4 (1.5) mm;
- after 12 months 4.3 (1.7) mm.
Group 2:
- baseline 4.1 (1.6) mm;
- after 12 months 4.1 (1.7) mm.
Radiologic bone loss was not significantly different between the groups (P = 0.8). 		Improved clinical parameters (e.g. BOP and PD) and MBL compared with the baseline were observed in both groups, with no significant difference between them.
Mean PD ≥ 6 mm:
Group 1:
- baseline 29.1 (31.6)%;
- after 12 months 2.1 (7)%.
Group 2:
- baseline 34.4 (31.8)%;
- after 12 months 1.4 (5.8)%.
No significant difference between the groups
(P = 0.6).

CPC = Cetylpyridinium chloride; CHX = chlorhexidine; MBL = marginal bone loss; PD = probing depth; BOP = bleeding on probing.