Search

Copyright of Parodontologie: die Zeitschrift für die Praxis (Berlin, Germany) is the property of Quintessenz Verlags GmbH and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Objective: To systematically assess studies regarding the efficacy of lasers in the nonsurgical treatment of peri-implantitis., Methods: Electronic and manual searches were performed by two reviewers independently. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing lasers vs. mechanical debridement or air abrasive on primary outcome (probing depth (PD)) and secondary outcomes (bone loss, bleeding on probing (BOP), clinical attachment level (CAL) and plaque index (PI)) were included. Data extraction and quality assessment were conducted independently. Weighted mean difference (WMD) or standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated for continuous outcomes. Publication bias, leave-one-out analysis and GRADE assessment were conducted., Result: 13 eligible publications were included in the review and 12 in the meta-analysis. Solid-state lasers significantly improved in PD (WMD = -0.39, 95% CI (-0.70, -0.09), p = 0.01, moderate-certainty evidence), BOP (SMD =-0.76, 95% CI (-1.23, -0.28), p = 0.002, moderate-certainty evidence) and CAL (WMD =-0.19, 95% CI (-0.39, -0.00), p = 0.05, moderate-certainty evidence), but not in bone loss (WMD = 0.03, 95% CI (-0.13, 0.18), p = 0.74, low-certainty evidence) and PI (SMD =-0.19, 95% CI (-0.42, 0.04), p = 0.11, moderate-certainty evidence) compared with the control group. However, the diode lasers showed no clinical advantages. No publication bias was detected, and leave-one-out analysis confirmed the robustness of findings., Conclusion: In the nonsurgical treatment of peri-implantitis, solid-state lasers yielded positive influence in term of PD, BOP and CAL, while diode laser provided no beneficial effect. Future well-designed large RCTs are still needed, considering the limitations of included studies., Clinical Relevance: This review aimed to guide clinicians in choosing the appropriate laser for peri-implantitis, enhancing treatment strategies and attaining better outcomes., Competing Interests: Declarations Ethical approval Not applicable. Patient consent for publication Not applicable. Human ethics and consent to participate declarations Not applicable. Clinical trial number Not applicable. Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Peri-implantitis, a complex condition that can lead to dental implant failure, is characterized by inflammatory destruction resulting from immune dysregulation. Oral microbial dysbiosis and foreign body stimulation are the main factors contributing to such dysregulation, impairing immune cell function and triggering an inflammatory response. Immune dysregulation plays a critical role in the pathophysiology of peri-implantitis, impacting the balance of T cell subsets, the production of inflammatory factors, and immune-related molecular signaling pathways. Understanding the relationship between immune dysregulation and peri-implantitis is crucial for developing targeted strategies for clinical diagnosis and individualized treatment planning. This review explores the similarities and differences in the immune microenvironment of oral bacterial infections and foreign body rejection, analyzes the relevant molecular signaling pathways, and identifies new key targets for developing innovative immunotherapeutic drugs and effective and personalized treatment modalities for peri-implantitis. Additionally, it addresses the challenges and potential directions for translating immunotherapy into clinical practice for peri-implantitis, offering insights that bridge the gaps in current literature and pave the way for future research., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Huang, Wang, Li, Lu, Li and Xu.)

Peri-implantitis is an inflammatory disease around dental implants that induces progressive bone resorption. Several procedures for decontaminating the implant surface and promoting bone growth have been established to treat this condition. The purpose of the present case report was to describe the decontamination method used to achieve peri-implant health in a 60-year-old man who had a single implant that had been in function in the mandibular left molar region for 10 years. The implant, in the region of the first molar, was osseointegrated and showed radiographic bone loss associated with a probing depth of 8 mm and bleeding on probing. The diagnosis was peri-implantitis, and a surgical treatment approach was selected to enable decontamination of the area with a combination of mechanical debridement, tetracycline hydrochloride (500 mg/mL), and photodynamic therapy. After the decontamination process, a sodium bicarbonate spray device was used, and a guided bone regeneration protocol with a xenogeneic graft and collagen membrane was performed to reestablish the peri-implant bone height. A connective tissue graft was placed to obtain a better biological seal and increase the peri-implant keratinized mucosa. Follow-up examinations performed 30 days, 5 months, 3 years, and 6 years after the surgical procedure revealed new bone formation and progressively reduced probing depths. The successful outcome in this case suggests that combining different decontamination procedures and a bone regeneration protocol could be an effective approach to inducing bone formation around dental implants in patients with peri-implantitis., Competing Interests: No conflicts of interest reported.

Objective: This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the comparative clinical efficacy of photodynamic therapy (PDT) versus other non-surgical treatments in managing peri-implantitis., Methods: Computer searches were conducted in databases including PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP, and Wanfang for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the clinical efficacy of Photodynamic Therapy (PDT) compared to other non-surgical methods in the treatment of peri-implantitis. The search period spanned from May 2000 to May 2023. Based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, literature was screened, data extracted, and the quality of the studies was assessed. Included studies were publicly published randomized controlled experiments focusing on the combination of photodynamic therapy and non-surgical methods compared to non-surgical methods alone in the treatment of peri-implantitis. Articles with insufficient or unclear definitions of peri-implantitis cases were excluded from the selected studies. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software., Results: Nine RCTs were included for Meta-analysis. Meta-analysis showed that patients in the PDT trial group had reduced peri-implant probing depth (PD) during the follow-up period compared with the control group [WMD=-0.40, 95%CI(-0.62,-0.17), P = .0005], and bleeding on probing (BOP) was reduced [WMD=-9.20, 95%CI(-13.69,-4.71), P < .0001] more significantly, and the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P < .05); while for Modified plaque index (mPI) decreased [MD=-0.07, 95%CI (-0.16, 0.01), P = .09], clinical attachment loss (CAL) gained [WMD=-0.66, 95%CI:(-1.46, 0.14), P = .11]. Plaque index (PI%) decreased [WMD=-1.66, 95%CI:(-3.43, 0.11), P = .07] insignificantly, and the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant (P > .05).Photodynamic Therapy (PDT) has been significantly effective in reducing periodontal pocket depth and gingival bleeding in the treatment of periodontal diseases. However, its efficacy in improving plaque control and promoting tooth attachment is limited, which may be attributed to its primary antibacterial action rather than promoting tissue repair., Conclusion: Compared to other non-surgical treatments, PDT treatment has significant advantages in reducing peri-implant probing depth and bleeding in patients with peri-implantitis. These results suggest that PDT may be a more effective non-surgical option for reducing probing depth and bleeding in patients with peri-implantitis. Of course, future studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods are needed to confirm these findings.

Objectives: Since peri-implantitis is an increasing and prevalent concern in clinical practice and there is no consensus regarding the best therapeutic protocol, this study evaluated the knowledge and behaviours of dentists working in Implantology regarding implant-related infections modulating factors and therapeutic protocols used in the management of peri-implantitis., Methods: Cross-sectional study was conducted with 86 Brazilian Implantology clinicians. Data were collected using a structured and online questionnaire evaluating socioeconomic characteristics, education, work/clinical practice, knowledge and attitudes regarding the risk factors and management of peri-implantitis. The reliability of the questionnaire was evaluated by test-retest technique. The questionnaire was developed based on the last consensus on peri-implant diseases (2018) and the current evidence related to implant-related infections. Descriptive, bivariate and logistic regression analyses were conducted adopting a significance level of 5%., Results: In this study, 89.5% of included dentists reported that already treated patients with peri-implantitis. Approximately 80% of dentists use antibiotics and mouth rinses during the treatment, and surgical procedures seem the main choice to treat peri-implantitis (91.8%) by dentists. As a preventive approach, 94.2% of dentists reported that routinely assessed biofilm accumulation in the follow-up visits after implant placement. Logistic regression showed that the self-reported ability to treat peri-implantitis was statistically (p < 0.05) higher among dentists who reported abilities to diagnose the disease and use laser for peri-implantitis treatment., Conclusion: Dentists working in Implantology have a good level of knowledge and behaviors in the management of peri-implantitis. However, the lack of consensus regarding the best treatment protocols may reflect dentist's behaviours because different treatment protocols have been used by evaluated clinicians., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Dental implants have become the most effective treatment option for replacing missing teeth, worldwide. The popularity and demand for dental implants are continually increasing. Nevertheless, its complications are undeniable. Peri-implant diseases, including peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis, are a multifaceted clinical condition. Therefore, it is in the best interest to optimize the management of peri-implantitis, and there are still numerous methods to treat and manage infections in the vicinity of dental implants. The main goal of peri-implantitis treatment is to arrest disease progression, eliminate infection, and reconstruct damaged tissues around the implant. The clinical evidence on treating peri-implantitis that is available in PubMed was reviewed. Additionally, we presented the most comprehensive management strategies. As a result, numerous clinical trials recommended mechanical debridement and local administration of antimicrobial agents as well as topical oxygen therapy to mitigate bacterial biofilm and manage infection. The regenerative (bone grafting) approach for the treatment of peri-implantitis is another effective method. Finally, implant surface engineering can address high antibacterial efficacy and site-specific biofilm reduction.

Objectives: This study evaluated the impact of self-management interventions based on the COM-B model on peri-implant conditions in older adults with periodontitis., Materials and Methods: The patients were randomly divided into two groups: Group 1 (control group) received only an oral health education (OHE) pamphlet. Group 2 (test group) performed a self-management intervention based on the COM-B model. Each patient was examined for the most inflammatory implant. The measurement parameters included self-efficacy, self-management ability, and clinical indicators such as probing depth (PD), bleeding on probing (BOP), modified gingival index (mGI), modified plaque index (mPI), and peri-implant mucositis severity score (PMSS). The data was collected at baseline, 4, 8, and 12 weeks., Results: 42 patients underwent testing for 3 months. After 12 weeks, the improvement of self-efficacy, self-management ability, and the reduction of BOP, mPI, and PMSS in the test group was significantly higher than in the control group., Conclusion: The study suggests that self-management interventions based on the COM-B model can enhance the self-management ability of older adults with periodontitis and reduce peri-implant inflammation. This method is more effective than distributing OHE pamphlets., Trial Registration: The randomized controlled clinical trial was registered on Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (No. ChiCTR2400082660, Date: 03/04/2024)., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Dental infections, such as apical Periodontitis, periodontitis, and peri-implantitis (PI), are closely associated with specific bacterial species, including Streptococcus mutans (S. mutans), Porphyromonas gingivalis (P. gingivalis), and Fusobacterium nucleatum (F. nucleatum), among others. Antibiotics are extensively utilized for prophylactic and therapeutic purposes in the treatment of dental infections and other dental-related issues. Unfortunately, the rapid emergence of antimicrobial resistance has accompanied the increased use of antibiotics in recent years. Specific bacterial pathogens have reached a critical stage of antibiotic resistance, characterized by the proliferation of pan-resistant strains and the scarcity of viable therapeutic alternatives. Therapeutic use of particular bacteriophage (phage) particles that target bacterial pathogens is one potential alternative to antibiotics that are now being seriously considered for treating bacterial illnesses. A kind of virus known as a phage is capable of infecting and eliminating bacteria. Because they can't infect cells in plants and animals, phages might be a harmless substitute for antibiotics. To control oral disorders including periodontitis and dental caries, several research have been conducted in this area to study and identify phages from human saliva and dental plaque. The capacity of these agents to disturb biofilms expands their effectiveness against dental plaque biofilms and oral pathogens in cases of periodontitis, PI, and apical periodontitis. This review summarizes the current antibacterial properties of phages used to treat a variety of dental infections, such as periodontitis, peri-implantitis, infected dentin, and apical periodontitis., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Peri-implantitis (PI), a pathological condition associated with plaque, affects the tissues around dental implants. In addition, peri-implant mucositis (PIM) is a precursor to the destructive inflammatory PI and is an inflammation of the soft tissues surrounding the dental implant. It is challenging to eradicate and regulate the PI treatment due to its limited effectiveness. Currently, there is a significant interest in the development and research of additional biocompatible materials to prevent the failure of dental implants. Nanotechnology has the potential to address or develop solutions to the significant challenge of implant failure caused by cytotoxicity and biocompatibility in dentistry. Nanoparticles (NPs) may be used as carriers for the release of medicines, as well as to make implant coatings and supply appropriate materials for implant construction. Furthermore, the bioactivity and therapeutic efficacy of metal NPs in peri-implant diseases (PID) are substantiated by a plethora of in vitro and in vivo studies. Furthermore, the use of silver (Ag), gold (Au), zinc oxide, titanium oxide (TiO 2 ), copper (Cu), and iron oxide NPs as a cure for dental implant infections brought on by bacteria that have become resistant to several medications is the subject of recent dentistry research. Because of their unique shape-dependent features, which enhance bio-physio-chemical functionalization, antibacterial activity, and biocompatibility, metal NPs are employed in dental implants. This study attempted to provide an overview of the application of metal and metal oxide NPs to control and increase the success rate of implants while focusing on the antimicrobial properties of these NPs in the treatment of PID, including PIM and PI. Additionally, the study reviewed the potential benefits and drawbacks of using metal NPs in clinical settings for managing PID, with the goal of advancing future treatment strategies for these conditions., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objectives: to adapt the supranational European Federation of Periodontology (EFP) Prevention and Treatment of Peri-implant Diseases - The EFP S3 Level Clinical Practice Guideline for UK healthcare environment, taking into account a broad range of views from stakeholders and patients., Sources: This UK version, based on the supranational EFP guideline [1] published in the Journal of Clinical Periodontology, was developed using S3-level methodology, combining assessment of formal evidence from 13 systematic reviews with a moderated consensus process of a representative group of stakeholders, and accounts for health equality, environmental factors and clinical effectiveness. It encompasses 55 clinical recommendations for the Prevention and Treatment of Peri-implant Diseases, based on the classification for periodontal and peri‑implant diseases and conditions [2]., Methodology: The UK version was developed from the source guideline using a formal process called the GRADE ADOLOPMENT framework. This framework allows for adoption (unmodified acceptance), adaptation (acceptance with modifications) and the de novo development of clinical recommendations. Using this framework, following the S3-process, the underlying evidence was updated and a representative guideline group of 111 delegates from 26 stakeholder organisations was assembled into four working groups. Following the formal S3-process, all clinical recommendations were formally assessed for their applicability to the UK and adoloped accordingly., Results and Conclusion: Using the ADOLOPMENT protocol, a UK version of the EFP S3-level clinical practice guideline for the Prevention and Treatment of Peri-implant Diseases was developed. This guideline delivers evidence- and consensus-based clinical recommendations of direct relevance to the UK healthcare community including the public., Clinical Significance: The S3-level-guidelines combine evaluation of formal evidence, grading of recommendations and synthesis with clinical expertise of a broad range of stakeholders. The international S3-level-guideline was implemented for direct clinical applicability in the UK healthcare system, facilitating a consistent, interdisciplinary, evidence-based approach with public involvement for the prevention and treatment of peri‑implant diseases., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Aim: Supportive therapy is key to prevent disease recurrence after peri-implantitis treatment. The primary objective was to quantify disease recurrence during supportive peri-implant therapy (SPIT) after peri-implantitis treatment. A secondary objective was to assess the success/failure of cumulative interceptive supportive therapy (CIST) after peri-implantitis treatment., Methods: Compliers (whether regular or erratic) with SPIT after peri-implantitis treatment during ≥12 months were retrospectively evaluated. CIST was prescribed whenever residual pockets ≥6 mm concomitant with profuse bleeding on probing (disease recurrence) were identified. Patient- and implant-related factors were analyzed to explore their associations with disease recurrence and the need for CIST., Results: Disease recurrence was considered in 28 patients (40 implants). Of these, 14 patients (23 implants) further demonstrated radiographic evidence of progressive bone loss (≥1 mm). This represented an overall disease recurrence following peri-implantitis treatment of ~20% and ~ 10% at patient and implant levels, respectively. Smokers, patients diagnosed at baseline with periodontitis grade C, and males were significantly more prone to exhibit recurrence. Patients undergoing CIST due to instability were not likely to respond favorably (~70% continued to exhibit residual pockets)., Conclusion: Disease recurrence during SPIT following peri-implantitis treatment on selected cases is ~20%. Patients undergoing CIST due to instability are not likely to respond favorably., (© 2024 The Authors. Journal of Periodontal Research published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Peri-implantitis is an infectious disease that causes inflammation of the tissue surrounding an implant. The aim of this systematic review of the literature is to assess the effect of the use of lasers in the nonsurgical treatment of peri-implantitis in order to estimate its benefits compared with conventional therapies. The review's protocol has been registered on PROSPERO international prospective register. The research strategy was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The inclusion criteria were as follows: in vivo studies, written in English, measurements of clinical parameters, minimum follow-up at 6 months and with nonsurgical control group, studies about photodynamic therapy, randomized clinical trial, and clinical trial. Electronic (on PubMed, Cochrane, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, and Report Evidence-based Practice Centers databases) and manual searches (in articles' references) were conducted until July 2021. Risk of bias was assessed for each reference thanks to the Cochrane Collaboration's tool. A total of 12 randomized clinical trials, with a high level of evidence, were selected and investigated in this systematic review. A table summarizes data extracted from these articles. It appears that the parameters improve favorably by using lasers, but without any significant difference. In accordance with the analysis of studies, our results show that laser therapy with specific characteristics allows to obtain beneficial therapeutic effects on wound healing in the short and the medium-term concerning the clinical parameters in the nonsurgical treatment of peri-implantitis. Concerning its long-term usefulness, it has yet to be confirmed. However, its benefits remains limited since the results agree that the effects of the laser are similar to those obtained by using conventional therapy.

Background: This study aimed to investigate the effect of erbium, chromium doped:yttrium,scandium,gallium,garnet (Er,Cr:YSGG) laser application combined with non-surgical mechanical debridement (MD) on clinical parameters and peri-implant crevicular fluid receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappa B ligand (RANKL) and osteoprotegerin (OPG) levels in the treatment of peri-implantitis., Methods: A total of 49 patients who underwent non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis were randomly divided into two groups. The control group (n = 26) received MD alone, while the laser group (n = 23) received MD+Er,Cr:YSGG. The clinical parameters (bleeding on probing [BoP], gingival index [GI], plaque index [PI], probing depth [PD]), marginal bone loss (MBL), and biochemical parameters (RANKL and OPG) were measured at baseline (T0) and 6 months after treatment (T1)., Results: There was a statistically significant decrease in all the clinical parameters in both groups at T1 compared to T0 (p < 0.05). The BoP, PD, MBL, and RANKL reductions were significantly higher in the laser group than in the control group (p = 0.046, p = 0.014, p = 0.047, p = 0.045, respectively). The OPG levels significantly increased at T1 in the laser group (p = 0.01). The OPG/RANKL ratio increased significantly in both groups at T1, which favored the laser group (p = 0.034)., Conclusions: Although both treatment methods were influential in treating peri-implantitis, the laser group (MD+Er,Cr:YSGG) yielded more favorable results by reducing clinical inflammation and improving biochemical parameters. Based on these findings, Er,Cr:YSGG laser may be a beneficial adjunctive treatment in this patient group., (© 2024 The Author(s). Journal of Periodontology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Academy of Periodontology.)

Objectives: To retrospectively assess the periodontal conditions of teeth adjacent to and contralateral to implants presenting with or without peri-implantitis, following non-surgical periodontal and peri-implant mechanical therapy., Materials and Methods: One hundred and one patients with existing dental implants and chronic periodontitis, who underwent non-surgical periodontal and peri-implant mechanical therapy, were included. The periodontal clinical probing depth (PPD), gingival recession (GR), and bleeding on probing (BOP) were recorded at six sites around the adjacent (Adj-) teeth and the contralateral (CL-) teeth relative to the implant. The potential factors influencing the periodontal conditions of 316 teeth were analyzed by multivariate linear regression models with generalized estimating equation methods and α = .05., Results: The PPD of Adj-teeth was significantly different from that of CL-teeth before and after non-surgical therapy when the implant was diagnosed with peri-implantitis (PI) (p < .05). The PPD of teeth was shown to be affected by neighboring implants diagnosed with peri-implantitis (β = .825 mm, p < .001), teeth adjacent to implants (β = .245 mm, p = .004), a molar tooth type (β = .435 mm, p = .019), and non-surgical therapy (β = -.522 mm, p < .001)., Conclusions: Relatively compromised periodontal conditions at Adj-teeth after non-surgical PI therapy were detected. Therefore, clinicians should be aware that non-surgical therapy may be less successful at teeth adjacent to implants with PI., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Once present, peri-implantitis is difficult to fully eliminate. Surgical interventions show some promising results in fighting the disease, but for the time being, prevention remains the strongest tool.

Objective: Peri-implantitis is one of the most common complications of implants. However, its pathogenesis has not been clarified. In recent years, mouse models are gradually being used in the study of peri-implantitis. This review aims to summarize the methods used to induce peri-implantitis in mice and their current applications., Method: Articles of peri-implantitis mouse models were collected. We analyzed the various methods of inducing peri-implantitis and their application in different areas., Results: Most researchers have induced peri-implantitis by silk ligatures. Some others have induced peri-implantitis by Pg gavage and LPS injection. Current applications of peri-implantitis mouse models are in the following areas: investigation of pathogenesis and exploration of new interventions, comparison of peri-implantitis with periodontitis, the interaction between systemic diseases and peri-implantitis, etc. CONCLUSION: Silk ligature for 2-4 weeks, Pg gavage for 6 weeks, and LPS injection for 6 weeks all successfully induced peri-implantitis in mice. Mice have the advantages of mature gene editing technology, low cost, and short time to induce peri-implantitis. It has applications in the study of pathogenesis, non-surgical treatments, and interactions with other diseases. However, compared with large animals, mice also have a number of disadvantages that limit their application., (© 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Objectives: Each year, approximately 5 million dental implants are placed in the United States and one out of three patients is likely to experience peri-implantitis (PI). The objectives were to compare the PI-related education, knowledge, attitudes, and professional behavior of periodontists and oral maxillofacial surgeons (OMS), and to explore relationships between these constructs of interest., Methods: A total of 389 periodontists and 161 OMS responded to a web-based survey. Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses (independent sample t-tests, chi-square tests, and correlational analyses) were conducted., Results: On average, periodontists reported a higher percentage of time spent in residency on implant surgery (21.02% vs. 7.27%; p < 0.001), better education about PI (5-point scale with 1 = not at all well: means: 2.86 vs. 2.59; p < 0.001), and better knowledge of risk factors (4.07 vs. 3.86; p < 0.001) than OMS. Periodontists argued that oral hygiene-related treatment (4.45 vs. 4.22; p = 0.001) and regeneration-focused treatments such as guided tissue regeneration (3.62 vs. 3.20; p < 0.001) contributed more to successfully treating PI and used these treatments more in their practices (4.86 vs. 4.56; p < 0.001/3.06 vs. 2.68; p < 0.001) than OMS. They also considered PI as a more serious problem than OMS (4.55 vs. 3.80; p < 0.001). The better the respondents' PI-related knowledge was, the more they considered PI as a serious problem (r = 0.19; p < 0.001). The more cases they treated per month, the more they considered PI as a serious problem (r = 0.19; p < 0.001)., Conclusions: The results of the present study highlight the lack of standardization in the specialty training of periodontists and OMS. Best practice guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of PI are needed to optimize graduate education about this important topic., (© 2024 The Authors. Journal of Dental Education published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Dental Education Association.)

Background: Peri-implant mucositis (PIM) is a pathological precursor of peri-implantitis, but its pattern of conversion to peri-implantitis is unclear and complicated to diagnose clinically, while none of the available protocols yield complete disease resolution. The aim of this study was the evaluation of PIM responsiveness to standard anti-infective mechanical treatment (AIMT) at clinical and biomarker levels, and estimation of the diagnostic capacity of bone markers as surrogate endpoints and predictors., Methods: Systemically healthy outpatients presenting one implant exhibiting clinical signs of inflammation confined within the soft tissue (PIM) and one healthy control (HC) implant at a non-adjacent position were included. Clinical parameters and peri-implant crevicular fluid samples were collected baseline and 6 months following mechanical therapy, to assess the levels of RANKL, OPG, and IGFBP2. PIM clustering was performed using machine learning algorithms., Results: Overall, 38 patients met the inclusion criteria. Therapy resulted in the reduction of all clinical and biological indicators, but respective values remained significantly higher compared to HC. Clinical examination noted 30% disease resolution at the 6-month follow-up, while 43% showed no active bone resorption. OPG showed positive prognostic value for treatment outcome, while the clustering based on active bone resorption did not differ in terms of therapeutic effectiveness., Conclusion: AIMT is effective in reducing the clinical and biological indicators of PIM, but complete clinical resolution was achieved in only 30% of the cases. Around one third of PIM patients exhibited active bone resorption bellow clinical detectability that was not associated with disease progression and poor treatment responsiveness., (© 2023 The Authors. Journal of Periodontology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Academy of Periodontology.)

Background: Peri-implantitis poses a significant challenge in dental implantology due to its potential to result in the loss of supporting tissue around dental implants. Surgical reconstruction is often recommended for intrabony defects, accompanied by various adjunctive therapies, such as antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT), for bacterial decontamination. However, the long-term efficacy of such treatments remains unclear., Methods: This clinical report presents a case of peri-implantitis management in a healthy 55-year-old male using guided bone regeneration principles and surface decontamination via aPDT. The patient exhibited peri-implantitis with probing pocket depths (PPD) of 7 mm at buccal sites, 5 mm at palatal sites, and significant bone loss around implant #12. The reconstructive approach involved preservation of the existing implant and following a non-submerged healing protocol. The surgical phase included meticulous debridement, chemical detoxification with hydrogen peroxide, and aPDT using a 670 nm diode laser with methylene blue as the photosensitizer. Xenogenic bone graft and a resorbable collagen membrane were applied and the patient was followed up to through a 5-year period., Results: Postsurgery the patient exhibited normal healing, and long-term follow-up at 5 years showed reduced PPD (2 mm buccally, 3 mm mid-palatally), complete intrabony defect fill, and stable bone levels, indicating successful treatment., Conclusions: This case report demonstrates the potential long-term success of a reconstructive approach with adjunctive aPDT in peri-implantitis management. However, it highlights the need for standardized protocols and further clinical trials to establish the clinical benefits of aPDT in surgical reconstruction of peri-implantitis defects, serving as valuable pilot data for future research., Key Points: Why is this case new information? Provides a rare 5-year insight into peri-implantitis intrabony defect reconstruction, offering extended success and outcomes not frequently documented. Demonstrates the efficacy of aPDT with a 670-nm diode laser in achieving successful long-term outcomes, contributing valuable evidence to existing literature.Keys to successful management of this case: Success involves initial non-surgical debridement followed by a reconstructive strategy, incorporating guided bone regeneration and surface decontamination via aPDT. Long-term success hinges on patient compliance with routine oral hygiene, emphasizing the importance of adherence to preventive measures post-reconstruction to minimize recurrence risk.What are the primary limitations to success in this case? Variability in photosensitizer uptake, and potential risks such as tissue damage and bacterial resistance pose challenges to the effectiveness of aPDT. The existing literature on aPDT in peri-implantitis treatment lacks standardization in methodology, laser parameters, and follow-up durations, making it challenging to establish a universally accepted protocol., (© 2023 The Authors. Clinical Advances in Periodontics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Academy of Periodontology.)

Abstract Aim To compare changes in clinical periodontal parameters (gingival consistency, colour, BOP, PI, PD) and changes of salivary inflammatory biomarkers (IL-1 β, IL-6, MMP-8, TNF- α and TIMP-1 between conventional, electronic cigarette smokers and non-smokers after peri-implant treatment. Methods Study participants were grouped into three groups (i) Conventional cigarette smokers (ii) Electronic cigarette smokers and (iii) non-smokers respectively. A total of 60 adult patients aged (40–56 years) with 60 implants with active per-impantitis was included.Clinical and Biological parameters were evaluated before surgical treatment at baseline, one, six and twelve month post treatment. Pearson’s chi-square test was used to compare the distribution of the categorical while Two-way repeated analysis of variance was used to compare the mean values of quantitative outcome variables among all study groups across the 4 time points. Results A total of 60 subjects (60 implants) were selected and classified into three groups as per their smoking method 20 participants in each group with one single targeted implant diagnosis with active peri-implantitis. The gingival colour, the change was statistically significant at one year of post treatment.The gingival consistency distribution across the three groups is not statistically significant at baseline, but it is statistically significant at one-month (p = 0.001), six months (p = 0.029) and at the completion of one-year (p = 0.018) post treatment. The plaque index of 100% of non-smokers had changed to ‘0’ and 35% change in cigarettes and 30% change in electronic smokers which is statistically significant (p = 0.016).The prevalence of BOP was observed in the three groups as 72%, 76.5% and 88.9% at baseline. The mean values of PD have shown statistically significant change across the three groups over the four-time intervals of observation (p = 0.024). The comparison of mean values of IL-1 β, IL-6 and TIMP-1 has shown statistically significant change across the three groups over the four intervals of observation (p

This umbrella review was conducted to assess the existing literature and scientific evidence on air powder water jet technology (APWJT) in periodontal and peri-implantitis therapy. A systematic literature search for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the last decade on the use of APWJT in periodontitis and implant patients was performed in the databases of MEDLINE/Ovid, Embase, Cochrane library and Scopus. An additional hand search on PubMed and Google Scholar was conducted. Ten articles that fit the inclusion criteria were selected after the full-text screening. Two systematic reviews, including one with a meta-analysis, investigated the use of APWJT in active periodontal therapy. The use of APWJT as an adjunct to conventional scaling and root planing (SRP) in active periodontal treatment showed improved results in the test group. Six articles, including two with a meta-analysis, reported on the use of APWJT as a stand-alone therapy or as an adjunct in supportive periodontal therapy. Similarly significant improved results were reported for the use of APWJT. Regarding the active treatment of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis, four systematic reviews could not show an improved clinical outcome when APWJT was used as an adjunct to conventional treatment measures. Furthermore, one article investigated APWJT as a stand-alone therapy or as an adjunct in supportive peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis therapy. In systematic reviews that also investigated patient perception, APWJT was generally well-tolerated by the patient. Within the limitations of this umbrella review, it can be concluded that the use of APWJT with low-abrasive powders such as glycine, erythritol or trehalose as an adjunct in active periodontitis therapy shows similar clinical results compared to conventional SRP alone. In surgical peri-implantitis treatment, APWJT can be used adjunctively. It could be considered that the use of APWJT in supportive periodontal treatment results in a comparable clinical outcome and an enhanced patient perception, as well as a shorter clinical time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To assess volumetric tissue changes following combined surgical therapy of peri‐implantitis over a follow‐up period of 24 months. Materials and Methods: A total of 20 patients (n = 28 implants) were diagnosed with peri‐implantitis and underwent access flap surgery, implantoplasty, and augmentative therapy at intrabony components (ie, combined therapy) using a natural bone mineral and a native collagen membrane. The peri‐implant region of interest (ROI) was intraorally scanned pre‐operatively (S0), and after 12 (S3) and 24 (S4) months. Digital files were superimposed for the assessment of volumetric changes between the referred time points. The change in thickness was assessed at a standardized ROI, segmented into two equidistant sections (ie, marginal and apical). Results: Peri‐implant tissues exhibited a nonsignificant mean thickness loss of 0.16 (95% CI: −4 to 0.06) and 0.17 mm (95% CI: −0.05 to 0.4) at S3 and S4, respectively. S0–S3 dimensional thickness changes at marginal and apical areas were −0.24 (95% CI: −0.48 to 0.002) and −0.19 mm (95% CI: −0.36 to −0.2), respectively. Dimensional changes from S0 to S4 amounted to −0.22 mm (95% CI: −0.46 to 0.02) and −0.07 mm (95% CI: −0.09 to 0.2), respectively. The thickness changes at marginal and apical ROIs were significant from S0 to S3. Clinical parameters (ie, plaque index, bleeding on probing, and probing depth) significantly improved over the 24‐month follow‐up period. Linear regression analyses revealed no significant association between baseline bone loss (%), width of keratinized mucosa, and mucosal recession scores and thickness changes. Conclusions: Peri‐implant tissues revealed minor volumetric changes at 12 and 24 months after combined surgical therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The major struggle in peri-implantitis therapy is the availability of successful decontamination of the infected implant surface. The main hypothesis of this study was the Er,Cr: YSGG laser decontamination efficacy investigation on the infected implant surfaces with various peri-implantitis defects. The primary objective of this study was to decide the efficacy of Er,Cr:YSGG laser as a decontamination tool at various peri-implantitis simulating defects. The secondary objective was to compare the efficacy of the Er,Cr: YSGG laser on oral biofilm removal between two protocols the first protocol (4 cycles at 2.5 min) and the second protocol (5 cycles at 5 min) at various peri-implantitis simulating defects., Materials and Methods: A total of 3 subjects whose plaque biofilms formed in-vivo on twenty-four tested implants were divided into four tested groups. Two native implants were tested as controls.The in vitro defect model was computer-aided designed and printed into a 3D-printed model with various anulations in peri-implant infrabony defects, which were 15,30,60,and 90 degrees., Results: Both Er, Cr: YSGG decontamination protocols at 50 mJ (1.5 W/30 Hz), 50% air, and 40% water were effective at reducing the total implant surface area/ biofilm ratio (%), but the second protocol had a markedly greater reduction in the duration of application (5 cycles at 5 min) than did the first protocol (4 cycles at 2.5 min)., Conclusion: The Er, Cr: YSGG laser is an effective decontamination device in various peri-implantitis defects. The second protocol(5 cycles at 5 min) with greater application time and circles is more effective than the first one. The defect angulation influence the decontamination capability in peri-implantitis therapy., Clinical Relevance (scientific Rationale for Study): Clinicians anticipate that the exploration of suitable therapeutic modalities for peri-implantitis therapy is limited by the obvious heterogeneity of the available evidence in the literature and need for a pre-clinical theoretical basis setup. The major challenges associated with peri-implantitis therapy include the successful decontamination of the infected implant surface, the absence of any damage to the treated implant surface with adequate surface roughness, and the biocompatibility of the implant surface, which allows osteoblastic cells to grow on the treated surface and is the key for successful re-osseointegration. Therefore, these are the expected empirical triads that need to be respected for successful peri-implantitis therapy. Failure of one of the triads represents a peri-implantitis therapeutic failure. The Er, Cr: YSGG laser is regarded as one of the expected devices for achieving the required triad., Trial Registration: "Efficacy of Er,Cr YSGG Laser in Treatment of Peri-implantitis"., Clinicaltrials: gov ID NCT05137821. First Posted date: 30 -11-2021., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

This network meta-analysis aims to compare the clinical efficacy of seven non-surgical therapies for peri-implant disease, including laser treatment, photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT), photodynamic therapy (PDT), systemic antibiotics (SA), probiotics, local antimicrobials (LA), and air-powder polishing (APP) combined with mechanical debridement (MD). We conducted searches in four electronic databases, namely PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library, to identify randomized controlled trials of non-surgical treatments combined with MD for individuals (aged at least 18 years) diagnosed with peri-implantitis or peri-implant mucositis with a minimum of 3 months follow-up. The outcomes of the study were the reduction in pocket probing depth (PPD) and bleeding on probing (BoP), plaque index (PLI), clinical attachment level (CAL), and marginal bone loss (MBL). We employed a frequency random effects network meta-analysis model to combine the effect sizes of the trials using standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Network meta-analyses include network plots, paired comparison forest plots, league tables, funnel plots, surface under the cumulative ranking area (SUCRA) plots, and sensitivity analysis plots. The results showed that, for peri-implantitis, PBMT +MD demonstrated the highest effect in improving PPD (SUCRA = 75.3%), SA +MD showed the highest effect in improving CAL (SUCRA = 87.4%, SMD = 2.20, and 95% CI: 0.38 to 4.02) and MBL (SUCRA = 99.9%, SMD = 3.92, and 95% CI. 2.90 to 4.93), compared to MD alone. For peri-implant mucositis, probiotics +MD demonstrated the highest effect in improving PPD (SUCRA = 100%) and PLI (SUCRA = 83.2%), SA +MD showed the highest effect in improving BoP (SUCRA = 88.1%, SMD = 0.77, and 95% CI: 0.27 to 1.28), compared to MD alone. Despite the ranking established by our study in the treatment of peri-implant disease, decisions should still be made with reference to the latest treatment guidelines. There is still a need for more high-quality studies to provide conclusive evidence and especially a need for studies regarding direct comparisons between multiple treatment options., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Bai et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

This report aims to present a treatment of retrograde peri-implantitis originating from apical periodontitis of an adjacent tooth in an 84-year-old male. Apical periodontitis of the maxillary left central incisor (#9) extended to the apex of the maxillary left lateral incisor implant (#10), which had been functioning for 16 years. Root canal treatment for #9 was performed, followed by root end surgery to treat the apical periodontitis, which showed a periapical radiolucency measured 1 cm in its greatest dimension. After the root end filling was placed, neither bone substitute materials nor barrier membranes were used to fill and cover the bony defect area. A 2-year postoperative radiograph confirmed the osseous healing around the apices of #9 and #10.

Aims: The microbial profiles of peri-implantitis and periodontitis (PT) are inconclusive. The controversies mainly arise from the differences in sampling sites, targeted gene fragment, and microbiome analysis techniques. The objective of this study was to explore the microbiomes of peri-implantitis (PI), control implants (CI), PT and control teeth (CT), and the microbial change of PI after nonsurgical treatment (PIAT)., Methods: Twenty-two patients diagnosed with both PT and peri-implantitis were recruited. Clinical periodontal parameters and radiographic bone levels were recorded. In each patient, the subgingival and submucosal plaque samples were collected from sites with PI, CI, PT, CT, and PIAT. Microbiome diversity was analyzed by high-throughput amplicon sequencing using full-length of 16S rRNA gene by next generation sequencing., Results: The 16S rRNA gene sequencing analysis revealed 512 OTUs in oral microbiome and 377 OTUs reached strain levels. The PI and PT groups possessed their own unique core microbiome. Treponema denticola was predominant in PI with probing depth of 8-10 mm. Interestingly, Thermovirga lienii DSM 17291 and Dialister invisus DSM 15470 were found to associate with PI. Nonsurgical treatment for peri-implantitis did not significantly alter the microbiome, except Rothia aeria., Conclusion: Our study suggests Treponemas species may play a pivotal role in peri-implantitis. Nonsurgical treatment did not exert a major influence on the peri-implantitis microbiome in short-term follow-up. PT and peri-implantitis possess the unique microbiome profiles, and different therapeutic strategies may be suggested in the future., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objectives: The aim of the present study was to explore peri-implantitis patients' sensations, expectations, and experiences of dental implants, the disease, as well as undergoing treatment with laser or mucosal flap surgery., Methods: Interviews were conducted with 18 patients who had been referred for treatment of peri-implantitis at a specialist clinic. The participants underwent either laser treatment or mucosal flap surgery of affected implants. Qualitative content analysis was used for processing the transcribed interviews with coding in categories and subcategories., Results: The analysis of the interviews was presented in a narrative way to display the variety of experiences in this patient group. Losing teeth was perceived as frustrating and negatively impacted their quality of life; however, receiving dental implants improved some aspects of the patients' lives. While some have symptoms, others did not seem to notice the incidence and development of peri-implantitis. Local anaesthesia was the worst part of both treatments and both modalities yielded only minor discomforts., Conclusion: There were a variety of positive and negative sensations and experiences perceived by patients with dental implants as a consequence of peri-implantitis, including a negative impact on quality of life. These findings emphasize the importance of thoroughly informing the potential and established dental implant patients of the risk of developing disease and its impact. The treatment of peri-implantitis created in general only slight discomfort for the patient., (© 2023 The Authors. International Journal of Dental Hygiene published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objectives: To assess both the clinical and immunological effectiveness of diode laser therapy when used as an adjunct to non-surgical mechanical therapy in managing peri-implantitis., Materials and Methods: A cohort of 27 participants, comprising 21 females and 6 males, agreed to take part in this investigation. 37 dental implants with peri-implantitis diagnosis were randomly allocated to either the laser group (n = 19) or the control group (n = 18). Evaluation of peri-implant clinical parameters and collection peri-implant crevicular fluid (PICF) samples occurred at baseline, as well as at 3 and 6-month follow-up intervals. The level of various biomarkers (TWEAK, IL-1β, sclerostin, IL-17, RANKL, OPG and IL-10) within the PICF were quantified using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay., Results: Significant time-dependent decreases in clinical and biochemical parameters were detected in both groups compared to the baseline. There were marked differences between the groups in terms of periodontal parameters, except probing depth, and IL-1β, IL-17, sclerostin levels in PICF at 3rd month follow-up. However, no statistically significant difference was detected at 6th month., Conclusions: Diode laser seems to be a reliable tool as an adjunct for supporting the nonsurgical mechanical treatment during the early stages of peri-implantitis. Furthermore, the findings suggest that IL-17, sclerostin and IL-1β may serve as promising biomarkers for assessing efficacy of peri-implantitis treatment., Clinical Relevance: Based on these outcomes, clinicians may consider the application of adjunctive use of diode laser to non-surgical peri-implantitis treatment to achieve better clinical and immunological improvements than nonsurgical peri-implantitis therapy alone in just early healing period. However, it should be noted that there was no difference between the two methods in the long term., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the current scientific evidence on the effectiveness of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) as an adjunctive treatment to mechanical debridement in the treatment of peri-implantitis. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses was followed. A protocol was registered in the International Prospective Registry of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO #CRD42022361684). The search was carried out in seven databases, with no restrictions regarding language or year of publication. Our work included studies that compared clinical periodontal parameters between individuals treated with mechanical debridement associated with aPDT and a control group of patients who had undergone mechanical debridement alone. Study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment (RoB 2.0) were performed by two review authors. Meta-analysis was performed. The mean difference (MD) and a 95% confidence interval (CI) were provided. Four hundred and seven-four studies were identified, of which five studies were included. The meta-analysis demonstrated that aPDT adjunctive to mechanical debridement in subjects with peri-implantitis resulted in greater reduction in probing depth 3 months after treatment than among subjects receiving treatment with mechanical debridement. Most of the included studies exhibit a low risk of bias. Adjunctive aPDT to mechanical debridement contributes to the improvement of peri-implant clinical parameters in individuals with peri-implantitis, in particular probing depth., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Dental implant therapy is a reliable treatment for replacing missing teeth. However, as dental implants become more widely used, peri-implantitis increasingly has become a severe complication, making successful treatment more difficult. As a result, the development of effective drug delivery systems (DDSs) and treatments for peri-implantitis are urgently needed. Carbon nanohorns (CNHs) are carbon nanomaterials that have shown promise for use in DDSs and have photothermal effects. The present study exploited the unique properties of CNHs to develop a phototherapy employing a near-infrared (NIR) photoresponsive composite of minocycline, hyaluronan, and CNH (MC/HA/CNH) for peri-implantitis treatments. MC/HA/CNH demonstrated antibacterial effects that were potentiated by NIR-light irradiation, a property that was mediated by photothermal-mediated drug release from HA/CNH. These antibacterial effects persisted even following 48 h of dialysis, a promising indication for the clinical use of this material. We propose that the treatment of peri-implantitis using NIR and MC/HA/CNH, in combination with surgical procedures, might be employed to target relatively deep affected areas in a timely and efficacious manner. We envision that this innovative approach will pave the way for future developments in implant therapy.

Background: Periodontitis and peri-implant diseases are chronic inflammatory conditions occurring in the mouth. Left untreated, periodontitis progressively destroys the tooth-supporting apparatus. Peri-implant diseases occur in tissues around dental implants and are characterised by inflammation in the peri-implant mucosa and subsequent progressive loss of supporting bone. Treatment aims to clean the pockets around teeth or dental implants and prevent damage to surrounding soft tissue and bone, including improvement of oral hygiene, risk factor control (e.g. encouraging cessation of smoking) and surgical interventions. The key aspect of standard non-surgical treatment is the removal of the subgingival biofilm using subgingival instrumentation (SI) (also called scaling and root planing). Antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) can be used an adjunctive treatment to SI. It uses light energy to kill micro-organisms that have been treated with a light-absorbing photosensitising agent immediately prior to aPDT., Objectives: To assess the effects of SI with adjunctive aPDT versus SI alone or with placebo aPDT for periodontitis and peri-implant diseases in adults., Search Methods: We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two other databases and two trials registers up to 14 February 2024., Selection Criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (both parallel-group and split-mouth design) in participants with a clinical diagnosis of periodontitis, peri-implantitis or peri-implant disease. We compared the adjunctive use of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT), in which aPDT was given after subgingival or submucosal instrumentation (SI), versus SI alone or a combination of SI and a placebo aPDT given during the active or supportive phase of therapy., Data Collection and Analysis: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures, and we used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. We prioritised six outcomes and the measure of change from baseline to six months after treatment: probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP), clinical attachment level (CAL), gingival recession (REC), pocket closure and adverse effects related to aPDT. We were also interested in change in bone level (for participants with peri-implantitis), and participant satisfaction and quality of life., Main Results: We included 50 RCTs with 1407 participants. Most studies used a split-mouth study design; only 18 studies used a parallel-group design. Studies were small, ranging from 10 participants to 88. Adjunctive aPDT was given in a single session in 39 studies, in multiple sessions (between two and four sessions) in 11 studies, and one study included both single and multiple sessions. SI was given using hand or power-driven instrumentation (or both), and was carried out prior to adjunctive aPDT. Five studies used placebo aPDT in the control group and we combined these in meta-analyses with studies in which SI alone was used. All studies included high or unclear risks of bias, such as selection bias or performance bias of personnel (when SI was carried out by an operator aware of group allocation). We downgraded the certainty of all the evidence owing to these risks of bias, as well as for unexplained statistical inconsistency in the pooled effect estimates or for imprecision when evidence was derived from very few participants and confidence intervals (CI) indicated possible benefit to both intervention and control groups. Adjunctive aPDT versus SI alone during active treatment of periodontitis (44 studies) We are very uncertain whether adjunctive aPDT during active treatment of periodontitis leads to improvement in any clinical outcomes at six months when compared to SI alone: PPD (mean difference (MD) 0.52 mm, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.74; 15 studies, 452 participants), BOP (MD 5.72%, 95% CI 1.62 to 9.81; 5 studies, 171 studies), CAL (MD 0.44 mm, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.64; 13 studies, 414 participants) and REC (MD 0.00, 95% CI -0.16 to 0.16; 4 studies, 95 participants); very low-certainty evidence. Any apparent differences between adjunctive aPDT and SI alone were not judged to be clinically important. Twenty-four studies (639 participants) observed no adverse effects related to aPDT (moderate-certainty evidence). No studies reported pocket closure at six months, participant satisfaction or quality of life. Adjunctive aPDT versus SI alone during supportive treatment of periodontitis (six studies) We were very uncertain whether adjunctive aPDT during supportive treatment of periodontitis leads to improvement in any clinical outcomes at six months when compared to SI alone: PPD (MD -0.04 mm, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.10; 3 studies, 125 participants), BOP (MD 4.98%, 95% CI -2.51 to 12.46; 3 studies, 127 participants), CAL (MD 0.07 mm, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.40; 2 studies, 85 participants) and REC (MD -0.20 mm, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.08; 1 study, 24 participants); very low-certainty evidence. These findings were all imprecise and included no clinically important benefits for aPDT. Three studies (134 participants) reported adverse effects: a single participant developed an abscess, though it is not evident whether this was related to aPDT, and two studies observed no adverse effects related to aPDT (moderate-certainty evidence). No studies reported pocket closure at six months, participant satisfaction or quality of life., Authors' Conclusions: Because the certainty of the evidence is very low, we cannot be sure if adjunctive aPDT leads to improved clinical outcomes during the active or supportive treatment of periodontitis; moreover, results suggest that any improvements may be too small to be clinically important. The certainty of this evidence can only be increased by the inclusion of large, well-conducted RCTs that are appropriately analysed to account for change in outcome over time or within-participant split-mouth study designs (or both). We found no studies including people with peri-implantitis, and only one study including people with peri-implant mucositis, but this very small study reported no data at six months, warranting more evidence for adjunctive aPDT in this population group., (Copyright © 2024 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Objectives: Periodontitis and peri-implantitis are oral infectious-inflammatory diseases associated with oral microbial dysbiosis. Microbiome-based therapies, characterized by manipulation of the microbiota, are emerging as promising therapeutic approaches to resolve the microbial dysbiosis and associated dysregulation of immune system. This review aims at summarizing recent progress on microbiome-based therapies in periodontitis and peri-implantitis, promoting a further understanding of the related therapeutic mechanisms., Subjects and Methods: Pertinent literatures focused on microbiome-based therapies for periodontitis and peri-implantitis are obtained from PubMed and Web of Science., Results: In this article, we review the roles and therapeutic mechanisms of four microbiome-based therapies, including probiotics, postbiotics, predatory bacteria and phages, and microbiota transplantation, in the management of periodontitis and peri-implantitis. Challenges facing this field are also discussed, highlighting the areas that require more attention and investigation., Conclusions: Microbiome-based therapies may serve as effective treatment for periodontitis and peri-implantitis. This review presents a new viewpoint to this field., (© 2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Objective: The objective of this study is to investigate the association of peri-implantitis (PI) and sinus membrane thickening and to assess the resolution of membrane thickening following intervention (implant removal or peri-implantitis treatment) aimed at arresting PI., Materials and Methods: Forty-five patients with 61 implants in the posterior maxillary region were retrospectively included in the study. Twenty-four patients were diagnosed with peri-implantitis (PI) and 21 had peri-implant health (PH). Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were evaluated to assess maxillary sinus characteristics, including membrane thickening, sinus occupancy and ostium patency. The CBCT scans taken 6 months after intervention aimed at arresting disease (implant removal or treatment of PI) in the PI group were also appraised and compared to baseline scans., Results: At baseline, all parameters evaluating membrane thickness disorders yielded significant differences between groups (p < .001). Patients with posterior maxillary implants diagnosed with PI were 7× more likely to present membrane thickening compatible with pathology when compared to patients with healthy implants (OR = 7.14; p = .005). Furthermore, the likelihood was 6x greater in implants diagnosed with PI to exhibit moderate membrane thickening (OR = 6.75, p = .001). The patients receiving interventions aimed at arresting PI experienced significant enhancement in all radiographic parameters related to the sinus cavity at the 6-month follow-up (p < .001), though these variations were similarly independent of whether treatment consisted of PI treatment or implant removal., Conclusions: Maxillary sinus membrane thickening and the permeability/obstruction of the ostium are frequently associated with the presence of PI in posterior implants. Interventions targeting disease resolution effectively reduce membrane thickness to levels compatible with maxillary sinus health., (© 2024 The Authors. Clinical Oral Implants Research published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Following a comprehensive patient examination, including the assessment of periodontal and peri-implant diseases as well as considering the patient's needs, a pretherapeutic prognosis for each tooth and implant is given. Teeth and implants with a secure pretherapeutic prognosis require simple procedures and may be regarded as secure abutments for function and with a doubtful pretherapeutic prognosis usually need a comprehensive therapy. Such teeth and implants must be brought into the category with a secure prognosis by means of additional therapy such as endodontic, restorative, and surgical procedures. Teeth and implants with a hopeless pretherapeutic prognosis should be extracted/explanted during the initial phase of cause-related therapy (i.e., infection control). For example, teeth with vertical root fracture or unrestorable caries and implants with mobility or unrestorable malposition fall into the category of hopeless units. The primary goal of periodontal and peri-implant therapy should be to arrest disease progression. The latest consensus statement highlights that periodontitis can be successfully controlled and treated teeth can be retained for life. Nevertheless, for patients with uncontrolled contributing factors, the endpoints might not always be achievable, and low disease activity may be an acceptable therapeutic goal. Similarly, the management of peri-implantitis frequently requires surgical intervention following nonsurgical therapy due to incomplete treatment outcomes. Different surgical modalities can be effective and lead to significant improvement; however, achieving complete resolution of peri-implantitis is challenging, not always predictable, and can depend on multiple baseline factors. Therefore, this review aims at summarising available evidence on the rationale for incorporating systemic, lifestyle-related, clinical, and radiographic prognostic factors into treatment planning of patients diagnosed with periodontal and peri-implant diseases., (Periodontology 2000© 2024 The Author(s). Periodontology 2000 published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Article Title and Bibliographic Information: Wang Y, Chen CY, Stathopoulou PG, Graham LK, Korostoff J, Chen YW. Efficacy of Antibiotics Used as an Adjunct in the Treatment of Peri-implant Mucositis and Peri-implantitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2022 Mar-Apr;37(2):235-249. doi:10.11607/jomi.9220. PMID: 35476853., Source of Funding: None., Type of Study/design: Systematic review with meta-analysis of data., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The compliance rate with supportive therapy following peri-implantitis treatment (SPIT) remains unknown. The present retrospective study was carried out to assess the compliance rate and the factors influencing compliance in a private practice setting., Materials and Methods: Patients were divided into three groups according to compliance rate: regular compliance (RC ≥2 SPIT/year), erratic compliance (EC <2 SPIT/year), and non-compliance (NC <1 SPIT/year). Overall, 17 patient- (n = 8) and site-related variables (n = 9) were explored as potential confounders of compliance. The Chi 2 test was applied to assess the association between categorical variables and determine the odds ratio (OR)., Results: The study comprised 159 patients restored with 1075 implants, of which 469 were treated for peri-implantitis and met the inclusion criteria. A total of 57.2% were RC, 25.8% EC, and 17% NC. The multivariate analysis showed that smoking and grade C periodontitis reduced the likelihood of RC (OR = 0.28, p < .001) when compared to complete edentulism or non-smoking. Moreover, age demonstrated being associated with follow-up when SPIT was interrupted in EC and NC (OR = 0.94, p = .007)., Conclusion: Comprehensive information, provided prior to peri-implantitis treatment, regarding the importance of adhering to SPIT after peri-implantitis treatment to achieve/maintain peri-implant health, resulted in ~60% regular compliance rate (NCT05772078)., (© 2024 The Authors. Clinical Oral Implants Research published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The prevalence of peri-implant diseases, driven by biofilm accumulation and influenced by factors such as the width of keratinized mucosa (KM), underscores the need for understanding their etiology and management., Purpose: To evaluate the association between the KM width and the clinical resolution of peri-implant mucositis after mechanical therapy., Materials and Methods: Patients with an implant diagnosed with peri-implant mucositis were allocated to two groups: wide band of KM (WKM ≥ 2 mm) and narrow/no band of KM (NKM < 2 mm). Data and submucosa biofilm were collected at baseline and at 8, 12, and 24 weeks after nonsurgical therapy. A Brunner-Langer model was estimated for longitudinal data to evaluate and compare changes in any clinical parameter throughout follow-up between both groups. Furthermore, the microbial profiles were evaluated by 16S rRNA gene sequencing., Results: A total of 38 implants were analyzed. At 24 weeks, bleeding on probing was substantially reduced in both groups, reaching statistical significance (p < 0.001). Treatment resulted in 23.9% less effective in achieving success for NKM. As such, NKM reduced the odds of disease resolution by 80% compared to WKM. The rest of the explored clinical parameters yielded more favorable outcomes for WKM versus NKM. Neither the alpha nor the beta diversity of the microbial profiles were significantly modulated by KM., Conclusions: KM width influences the clinical resolution of peri-implant mucositis after mechanical therapy (https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04874467?cond=keratinized%20mucosa&rank=8, NCT04874467, 04/30/2021)., (© 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

The purpose of this review was to summarize the evidence with regard to behavioral and psychosocial assessment of the periodontitis patient, the candidate for implant therapy, and the peri-implantitis patient. Periodontitis has an adverse effect on quality of life and its treatment can lead to significant improvements experienced by the patient. The latter is true for rehabilitation with dental implants, although patients harbor diverse expectations and perceptions of implant therapy, which can often interfere with satisfaction and/or influence long-term success. A thorough behavioral assessment of the candidate for implant therapy is essential, which should include, perceptions, expectations, as well as risk for behavioral disorders. Remedial action is essential to correct misperceptions and any identified risks. Finally, patients have limited awareness of limited ability to identify signs of peri-implantitis. The diagnosis of peri-implantitis can be a cause of significant distress, resentment, and loss of trust to the treatment and the caregivers. Despite documented value in clinical research, currently available instruments assessing patient-reported outcomes have little application in day-to-day clinical practice. Face-to-face patient to doctor open-ended communication remains the most effective way to comprehensively establish the long-term "therapeutic alliance" essential for the long journey for the periodontitis patient., (© 2024 The Author(s). Periodontology 2000 published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aim: To assess the changes in peri‐implant soft tissue levels after the surgical treatment of peri‐implantitis. Methods: Randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials, cohort studies and case series, evaluating the changes in the position of the mucosal margin before and after surgical treatment of peri‐implantitis, were searched. Secondary outcomes were changes in keratinized mucosa (KM), radiographic bone levels, probing depths (PD), plaque indices, bleeding on probing and patient perception. Meta‐analyses were performed to determine weighted mean differences (WMD) or effects (WME). Results: Twenty‐six articles, reporting 20 investigations, were included. Reconstructive approaches yielded significantly less increase in mucosal recession, when compared to access flaps (n = 3, WMD = −1.35 mm, 95% confidence interval [CI] [−2.62; −0.07], p =.038). When comparing among reconstructive surgical interventions similar outcomes were observed irrespective of the use of a barrier membrane (n = 3, WMD = −0.01 mm, 95% CI [−0.15; 0.13], p =.917). When considering the effects over time, limited mucosal recession was observed after reconstructive procedures (n = 23, WME = 0.389 mm, 95% CI [0.204; 0.574]), p =.001), while increased recession was reported with either resective or access flap surgery (n = 6, WME = 1.21 mm, 95% CI [0.70; 1.72], p = <.001; and n = 3, WME = 0.95 mm, 95% CI [0.20; 2.10], p =.106; respectively). When resective and reconstructive approaches were combined the highest values on peri‐implant recession were reported (n = 2, WME = 1.97 mm, 95% CI [0.81; 3.14], p <.001). Reconstructive surgical interventions were associated with greater radiographic bone level gains, while similar values were reported for PD reduction when comparing reconstructive, access and resective procedures. Conclusions: Resective surgical procedures were associated with significant post‐surgical recession while minimal recession was observed in regenerative interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To compare changes in clinical periodontal parameters (gingival consistency, colour, BOP, PI, PD) and changes of salivary inflammatory biomarkers (IL-1 β, IL-6, MMP-8, TNF- α and TIMP-1 between conventional, electronic cigarette smokers and non-smokers after peri-implant treatment. Methods: Study participants were grouped into three groups (i) Conventional cigarette smokers (ii) Electronic cigarette smokers and (iii) non-smokers respectively. A total of 60 adult patients aged (40–56 years) with 60 implants with active per-impantitis was included.Clinical and Biological parameters were evaluated before surgical treatment at baseline, one, six and twelve month post treatment. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare the distribution of the categorical while Two-way repeated analysis of variance was used to compare the mean values of quantitative outcome variables among all study groups across the 4 time points. Results: A total of 60 subjects (60 implants) were selected and classified into three groups as per their smoking method 20 participants in each group with one single targeted implant diagnosis with active peri-implantitis. The gingival colour, the change was statistically significant at one year of post treatment.The gingival consistency distribution across the three groups is not statistically significant at baseline, but it is statistically significant at one-month (p = 0.001), six months (p = 0.029) and at the completion of one-year (p = 0.018) post treatment. The plaque index of 100% of non-smokers had changed to '0' and 35% change in cigarettes and 30% change in electronic smokers which is statistically significant (p = 0.016).The prevalence of BOP was observed in the three groups as 72%, 76.5% and 88.9% at baseline. The mean values of PD have shown statistically significant change across the three groups over the four-time intervals of observation (p = 0.024). The comparison of mean values of IL-1 β, IL-6 and TIMP-1 has shown statistically significant change across the three groups over the four intervals of observation (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: Electronic cigarette smoking was found to be most prevalent risk indicator for peri-implantitis. Compromised response of peri-implantitis treatment both clinically and biologically was found more among electronic cigarette smokers when compared to conventional cigarette smokers and non-smokers. Trial registration: This case-control study was conducted at King Saud University's Dental College, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, in accordance with "Helsinki Declaration of Human Studies" and approved by the Institutional Review Board (Reference no: 87563). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Tooth loss during the lifetime of an individual is common. A strategy to treat partial or complete edentulous patients is the placement of dental implants. However, dental implants are subject to bacterial colonization and biofilm formation, which cause an infection named peri-implantitis. The existing long-term treatments for peri-implantitis are generally inefficient. Thus, an electrical circuit was produced with zirconia (Zr) samples using a hot-pressing technique to impregnate silver (Ag) through channels and holes to create a path by LASER texturing. The obtained specimens were characterized according to vitro cytotoxicity, to ensure ZrAg non-toxicity. Furthermore, samples were inoculated with Staphylococcus aureus using 6.5 mA of alternating current (AC). The current was delivered using a potentiostat and the influence on the bacterial concentration was assessed. Using AC, the specimens displayed no bacterial adhesion (Log 7 reduction). The in vitro results presented in this study suggest that this kind of treatment can be an alternative and promising strategy to treat and overcome bacterial adhesion around dental implants that can evolve to biofilm.

Peri-implantitis is a bacterial infection that causes soft tissue inflammatory lesions and alveolar bone resorption, ultimately resulting in implant failure. Dental implants for clinical use barely have antibacterial properties, and bacterial colonization and biofilm formation on the dental implants are major causes of peri-implantitis. Treatment strategies such as mechanical debridement and antibiotic therapy have been used to remove dental plaque. However, it is particularly important to prevent the occurrence of peri-implantitis rather than treatment. Therefore, the current research spot has focused on improving the antibacterial properties of dental implants, such as the construction of specific micro-nano surface texture, the introduction of diverse functional coatings, or the application of materials with intrinsic antibacterial properties. The aforementioned antibacterial surfaces can be incorporated with bioactive molecules, metallic nanoparticles, or other functional components to further enhance the osteogenic properties and accelerate the healing process. In this review, we summarize the recent developments in biomaterial science and the modification strategies applied to dental implants to inhibit biofilm formation and facilitate bone-implant integration. Furthermore, we summarized the obstacles existing in the process of laboratory research to reach the clinic products, and propose corresponding directions for future developments and research perspectives, so that to provide insights into the rational design and construction of dental implants with the aim to balance antibacterial efficacy, biological safety, and osteogenic property., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

As utilisation of dental implants continues to rise, so does the incidence of biological complications. When peri-implantitis has already caused extensive bone resorption, the dentist faces the dilemma of which therapy is the most appropriate to maintain the implant. Since non-surgical approaches of peri-implantitis have shown limited effectiveness, the present paper describes different surgical treatment modalities, underlining their indications and limitations. The primary goal in the management of peri-implantitis is to decontaminate the surface of the infected implant and to eliminate deep peri-implant pockets. For this purpose, access flap debridement, with or without resective procedures, has shown to be effective in a large number of cases. These surgical treatments, however, may be linked to post-operative recession of the mucosal margin. In addition to disease resolution, reconstructive approaches also seek to regenerate the bone defect and to achieve re-osseointegration., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Peri-implant mucositis is characterised by inflammation of soft tissues surrounding a dental implant without associated bone loss beyond initial remodelling. Early detection and timely intervention are critical to prevent its progression to peri-implantitis. This paper focuses on various treatment options for treating peri-implant mucositis. The cornerstone of professional treatment lies in the mechanical disruption and removal of microbial biofilms around the implant. This can be achieved through careful use of manual or powered instruments, such as ultrasonic scalers or air polishing devices. However, there is a need for further research to determine the most effective single approach for treating peri-implant mucositis. Current evidence does not support the combination of mechanical debridement with locally administered antibiotics. Contrarily, evidence strongly supports the removal, cleaning, and modifications of prostheses to improve both self-performance and professional cleanability. The use of adjunctive therapies like photodynamic therapy and diode laser, in conjunction with mechanical instrumentation, is not currently recommended due to the limited strength of available evidence. Preventive measures emphasise the importance of comprehensive oral hygiene care, encompassing professional guidance and at-home practices, to manage biofilms effectively. This encompasses oral hygiene instruction, regular debridement, and maintenance care. Supporting peri-implant therapy is also vital for ongoing implant monitoring, preventing the recurrence of mucositis, and halting its progression to peri-implantitis. This multifaceted approach is key to effectively managing and treating peri-implant mucositis., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to the British Dental Association.)

Purpose: Dental implants have been successfully implemented as a treatment for tooth loss. However, peri-implantitis, an inflammatory reaction owing to microbial deposition around the implant, can lead to implant failure. So, it is necessary to treat peri-implantitis. Therefore, this numerical study is aimed at investigating conditions for treating peri-implantitis., Methods: Photothermal therapy, a laser treatment method, utilizes photothermal effect, in which light is converted to heat. This technique has advantage of selectively curing inflamed tissues by increasing their temperature. Accordingly, herein, photothermal effect on peri-implantitis is studied through numerical analysis with using Arrhenius damage integral and Arrhenius thermal damage ratio., Results: Through numerical analysis on peri-implantitis treatment, we explored temperature changes under varied laser settings (laser power, radius, irradiation time). We obtained the temperature distribution on interface of artificial tooth root and inflammation and determined whether temperature exceeds or does not exceed 47℃ to know which laser power affects alveolar bone indirectly. We defined the Arrhenius thermal damage ratio as a variable and determined that the maximum laser power that does not exceed 47℃ at the AA' line is 1.0 W. Additionally, we found that the value of the Arrhenius thermal damage ratio is 0.26 for a laser irradiation time of 100 s and 0.50 for 500 s., Conclusion: The result of this numerical study indicates that the Arrhenius thermal damage ratio can be used as a standard for determining the treatment conditions to help assisted laser treatment for peri-implantitis in each numerical analysis scenario., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Peri-implant diseases are defined as bacterial plaque-induced inflammatory conditions affecting implant-surrounding tissues and are classified as peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. Peri-implant mucositis is characterized by an inflammatory lesion that resides in the soft tissue compartment, whereas at peri-implantitis sites the lesions also feature progressive loss of implant-supporting bone. Inflammation resolution and disease progression arrestment are the main therapeutic endpoints of the treatment of peri-implant diseases. The present position paper displays the current evidence and clinical recommendations of the European Association for Osseointegration for the treatment of peri-implant diseases. Mechanical biofilm removal along with the reinforcement of patient-administered oral hygiene is considered the standard treatment for managing peri-implant mucositis. It is recommended to assess the outcomes of peri-implant mucositis treatment 2 to 3 months after therapy, and repeated intervention should be considered in the absence of treatment success. Peri-implantitis treatment should follow a stepwise treatment approach, starting with nonsurgical treatment followed by surgical intervention, if that is not sufficient. Surgical peri-implantitis therapies include nonreconstructive, reconstructive, and combined treatment modalities. Implantoplasty may be advocated for the treatment of supracrestal peri-implant defects, whereas reconstructive therapy is indicated at peri-implantitis sites featuring intraosseous defects with a depth ≥ 3 mm. Adjunctive reconstructive measures may be beneficial in enhancing radiographic defect fill and maintaining postoperative soft tissue levels, which may have a great impact in esthetic cases. The adjunctive use of systemic antibiotics during surgical therapy does not seem to improve the clinical outcomes. Regular supportive peri-implant therapy with biofilm removal should be an integral part of the treatment protocol for peri-implant diseases. In the presence of advanced bone loss around implants that do not play a strategic role in masticatory function, implant removal may be considered immediately.

Background: Peri-implant diseases (peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis) are pathologies of an infectious-inflammatory nature of the mucosa around dental implants. Probiotics are microorganisms that regulate host immunomodulation and have shown positive results in the treatment of peri-implant diseases. The objective of the systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of probiotics in the treatment of peri-implant oral diseases., Methods: According to the PRISMA guidelines, the research question was established: Are probiotics able to favorably modify clinical and immunological biomarkers determinants of peri-implant pathologies? and an electronic search of the databases MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central, Web of Science, (until December 2023) was performed. Inclusion criteria were established for intervention studies (RCTs), according to the PICOs strategy in subjects with peri-implant pathology (participants), treated with probiotics (intervention) compared to patients with conventional treatment or placebo (control) and evaluating the response to treatment (outcomes). Results- 1723 studies were obtained and 10 were selected. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and methodological quality using the Joanna Briggs Institute for RCTs. Two meta-analyses were performed, one to evaluate probiotics in mucositis and one for peri-implantitis. All subgroups were homogeneous (I 2 =  0%), except in the analysis of IL-6 in mucositis (I 2 =  65%). The overall effect was favorable to the experimental group in both pathologies. The analysis of the studies grouped in peri-implantitis showed a tendency to significance (p=0.09)., Conclusion: The use of probiotics, as basic or complementary treatment of peri-implant diseases, showed a statistically significant trend, but well-designed studies are warranted to validate the efficacy of these products in peri-implant pathologies., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 López-Valverde, López-Valverde and Blanco Rueda.)

This article highlights the role of dental imaging techniques, including periapical, bitewing, panoramic, and cone-beam computed tomography images, in the diagnostic and therapeutic decision-making process for patients with periodontal and peri-implant disease. A brief overview of common radiographic findings of periodontal disease, including periodontitis, and peri-implantitis is also provided., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Peri-implantitis, an inflammatory condition in implant tissues, requires bacterial eradication and implant surface decontamination, with aPDT as a helpful surgical adjunct. Objective: This project was designed to investigate the effect of antibiotic therapy versus aPDT, as adjuncts to conventional mechanical debridement (MD), on the peri-implant clinical and/or radiographic parameters among patients with peri-implant diseases. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted across electronic databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, up to and including April 2023, without any restriction on the language and year of publication, focusing the following research question: "Does adjunctive aPDT improve the peri-implant clinical and/or radiographic parameters in treating peri-implant diseases compared to antibiotic therapy?" Statistical analysis was performed on peri-implant clinical [plaque index (PI), probing depth (PD), and bleeding on probing (BOP)] and radiographic parameters [marginal bone loss (MBL)]. The study included six randomized controlled trials and one clinical (nonrandomized) study. Results: The systematic review findings indicate that the application of aPDT as an adjunct to MD is equally effective as adjunctive antibiotic therapy in improving peri-implant clinical parameters and radiographic parameters in patients with peri-implant diseases. Only two studies were classified as having a low risk of bias (RoB), two were assessed as having an unclear RoB, and the remaining three studies were determined to have a high RoB. However, the meta-analysis results revealed no statistically significant difference in peri-implant PI, PD, and MBL scores between patients treated with adjunct aPDT or adjunct antibiotic therapy. Notably, there was a statistically significant difference favoring adjunct aPDT in peri-implant BOP values compared to the control group. Conclusions: Despite the limited number of included studies and the significant heterogeneity among them, the findings suggest that aPDT yields comparable peri-implant clinical and radiographic outcomes to adjunctive antibiotic therapy, as adjuncts to MD, for the potential treatment of peri-implant diseases.