Evaluation of a single non-surgical approach in the management of periimplantitis: glycine powder air-polishing versus ultrasonic device

Background: Precise dimensional impression accuracy is crucial in dental prosthetiDental implants are often used to replace lost teeth and present a high level of predictability, patient satisfaction, and long-term success. However, biological complications such as peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis have become major challenges to the profession. Peri-implant mucositis is an inflammation of the soft tissues adjacent to a dental implant diagnosed with bleeding on gentle probing (<0.20 N). if the clinical signs are combined with bone loss, the condition is called peri-implantitis. The treatment goal of peri-implant disease is to remove or significantly depress the levels of pathogens to allow the healing of the soft and hard tissues. Peri-implant mucositis is a common clinical entity that may develop into peri-implantitis, so early recognition and proper diagnosis of peri-implant disease are highly important in the treatment. The presence study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcome (probing depth PD, bleeding on probing BoP, plaque index PI) following treatment of peri-implantitis with a single non-surgical approach using a glycine powder air-polishing (GPAP) or an ultrasonic device over 2 months. Thirty implants were enrolled and randomly assigned to test (GPAP) and control (ultrasonic device) groups. Significant differences were found in the mean of the clinical outcome evaluation, but further observations of larger sample size of patients are needed.