hkr.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Surgical treatment of peri-implantitis using a bone substitute with or without a resorbable membrane: a prospective cohort study
Kristianstad University, Department of Health Sciences.
Kristianstad University, Department of Health Sciences.
Kristianstad University, Department of Health Sciences.
Kristianstad University, Department of Health Sciences.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0992-2362
2007 (English)In: Journal of Clinical Periodontology, ISSN 0303-6979, E-ISSN 1600-051X, Vol. 34, no 7, 625-632 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objectives: The aim of this prospective cohort study was to compare two regenerative surgical treatment modalities for peri-implantitis. Material and Methods: Thirty-six patients having a minimum of one osseointegrated implant, with a progressive loss of bone amounting to >= 3 threads (1.8 mm) following the first year of healing, combined with bleeding and/or pus on probing, were involved in this study. The patients were assigned to two different treatment strategies. After surgical exposure of the defect, granulomatous tissue was removed and the infected implant surface was treated using 3% hydrogen peroxide. The bone defects were filled with a bone substitute (Algipore((R))). In 17 patients (Group 1), a resorbable membrane (Osseoquest((R))) was placed over the grafted defect before suturing. In 19 patients (Group 2), the graft was used alone. Results: One-year follow-up demonstrated clinical and radiographic improvements. Probing depths were reduced by 2.9 mm in Group 1 and by 3.4 mm in Group 2. Defect fill amounted to 1.5 and 1.4 mm, respectively. There was no significant difference between the groups. Conclusion: It is possible to treat peri-implant defects with a bone substitute, with or without a resorbable membrane.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2007. Vol. 34, no 7, 625-632 p.
Keyword [en]
Bone substitute, defect fill, healing, peri-implantitis, resorbable, membrane, surgery, GUIDED TISSUE REGENERATION, 14-YEAR FOLLOW-UP, ORAL IMPLANTS, LETHAL, PHOTOSENSITIZATION, INTRAOSSEOUS DEFECTS, PERIODONTAL THERAPY, CYNOMOLGUS MONKEYS, INTRABONY DEFECTS, CIGARETTE-SMOKING, EPTFE MEMBRANE
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hkr:diva-176DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2007.01102.xISI: 000247114600011PubMedID: 17555414ISBN: 0303-6979 (print)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hkr-176DiVA: diva2:160228
Available from: 2009-02-12 Created: 2009-02-11 Last updated: 2014-05-28Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Lindahl, ChristelRenvert, Stefan
By organisation
Department of Health Sciences
In the same journal
Journal of Clinical Periodontology
Dentistry

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 29 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf