AIM: To compare two regenerative surgical treatments for peri-implantitis over five years.

MATERIAL & METHODS: Twenty-five individuals with peri-implantitis remained at study endpoint. They were treated with a bone substitute and a resorbable membrane (13 individuals with 23 implants) [Group 1], or with bone substitute alone (12 individuals with 22 implants)[Group 2]. All study individuals were kept on a strict maintenance program every third month.

RESULTS: 5-year follow up demonstrated clinical and radiographic improvements in both groups. No implants were lost due to progression of peri-implantitis. Probing depths were reduced by 3.0 mm ± 2.4 mm in Group 1, and 3.3 mm ± 2.09 mm in Group 2 (NS). In both groups, radiographic evidence of bone gain was significant (p < 0.001). At year 5, the average defect fill was 1.3 mm (S.D. ± 1.4 mm) in Group 1 and 1.1 mm (S.D.± 1.2 mm) in Group 2 (mean diff; 0.4 95% CI -0.3,1,2, p=0.24). Bleeding on probing decreased in both groups. Baseline and year 5 plaque scores did not differ between groups and was reduced from 50% to 15%.

CONCLUSION: Both procedures resulted in stable conditions. Additional use of a membrane does not improve the outcome. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.