Skip to main content

Table 4 Key characteristics of implant maintenance studies

From: Efficacy of air polishing in comparison with hand instruments and/or power-driven instruments in supportive periodontal therapy and implant maintenance: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Study

Population

Study design

Case definition

Treatment groups

Variables

Treatment outcome

Lupi et al. [17]

Setting: University

RCT

No signs of inflammation or mucositis

Test: GPAP with Perio-Flow nozzle (5 s each site)

Primary: PPD change

Mean PPD reduction:

Test = 0.64 mm; Control =  − 0.31 mm

 

Parallel

 
 

46 subjects (35 partial; 11 total edentulism) with 88 implants

Examiner-masked

No PPD ≥ 4 mm and suppuration; No bone resorption ≥ 30% compared to initial situation; No implant mobility

 

Clinical: PI, BOP, PPD, CAL, bleeding score

 

Italy

 

Control: Plastic curettes + irrigation with 0.1% CHX + submucosal application 1% CHX gel

GPAP statistically improved PPD, PI, BOP and bleeding score after 6 months; more effective than Control in maintaining the peri-implant health of PPD. No significant changes of CAL in both groups

  

Duration: 6 months

 
 

Mean age: 54.2 y

 

PROMs: Not reported

 

Gender: Not reported

 

Without local anaesthesia

 
   

Timepoints: Baseline, 3- and 6-month

 

Smoking status: Non-smokers

 

At least 2 mm keratinized peri-implant mucosa

Retreatment: at monthly basis

Ziebolz et al. [21]

Setting: Multicentre study (7 dental practices)

RCT

Not specified

Test (Adjunctive AP):

Primary: Not reported

No significant implant-related differences in PPD, MR and BOP in group 2), 3) and 4) between baseline and follow-up, while group 2) showed a significant difference in PPD

Parallel

 

1) Curette + GPAP + prophylaxis brush

 
  

Masking not mentioned

Study began after prosthetic restoration of a previously inserted implant with no signs of inflammation, no previous non-surgical or surgical therapy

Clinical: Papillary bleeding index, approximal PI, PPD, MR, BOP

Germany

62 subjects (partially or fully edentulous) with 101 implants

2) Curette + GPAP + prophylaxis brush + CHX varnish

 

Duration: 12 months

 

Mean age: 55.21 ± 11.3 y

  

Control (Adjunctive Sc):

PROMs: Not reported

 
    

3) Curette + sonic scaler + prophylaxis brush

  
    

Timepoints: baseline and 12-month

 
 

Gender: 27 F, 35 M

  

4) Curette + sonic scaler + polishing with prophylaxis brush + CHX varnish

 
 

Smoking status: Non-smoker

    
    

Retreatment: 3-, 6-, 9-month

  
  1. AP air-polishing; BOP bleeding on probing; CAL clinical attachment level; CHX chlorhexidine; F female; GI gingival index; GPAP glycine powder air-polishing; M male; MR mucosal recession; PI plaque index; PPD probing pocket depth; PROMs patient reported outcome measures; RCT randomised controlled clinical trial; Sc scaling; SPT supportive periodontal therapy; VAS visual analogue scale