Short‐term comparison of two non‐surgical treatment modalities of peri‐implantitis: Clinical and microbiological outcomes in a two‐factorial randomized controlled trial.

Aim: To compare the efficacy of two different therapies (amino acid glycine abrasive powder and a desiccant material) and their combination in the non‐surgical treatment of peri‐implantitis. Materials and Methods: This was an examiner‐blind randomized clinical trial, with 2‐factorial design with a follow‐up of 6 months. The combination of the two factors resulted in four interventions: (a) non‐surgical debridement alone (C); (b) non‐surgical debridement and a desiccant material (H); (c) non‐surgical debridement and glycine powder (G); and (d) non‐surgical debridement, desiccant material and glycine powder (HG). Results: Sixty‐four patients with peri‐implantitis were randomized, 16 for each intervention. After six months, two implants failed in the G intervention. Mean pocket depth reduction was higher in patients treated with the desiccant material (estimated difference: 0.5 mm; 95% CI from 0.1 to 0.9 mm, p =.0229) while there was no difference in the patients treated with glycine powder (estimated difference: 0.1 mm; 95% CI from −0.3 to 0.5 mm, p =.7333). VAS for pain during intervention and VAS for pain after one week were higher for patients treated with glycine powder (p =.0056 and p =.0339, respectively). The success criteria and other variables did not reveal differences between interventions. Conclusions: In this 6‐month follow‐up study, pocket reduction was more pronounced in patients using the desiccant material. Pain was higher in patients using glycine. All the interventions resulted in low success rate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]