Short-term comparison of two non-surgical treatments modalities of peri-implantitis. Clinical and microbiological outcomes in a two-factorial randomised 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 randomised clinical trial, with 2-factorial design with a follow-up of 6 months. The combination of the two factors resulted in four interventions: 1.Non-surgical debridement alone (C); 2.Non-surgical debridement and a desiccant material (H); 3.Non-surgical debridement and glycine powder (G); 4.Non-surgical debridement, desiccant material and glycine powder (HG). RESULTS Sixty-four patients with peri-implantitis were randomised, 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 0.5mm, 95%CI from 0.1 to 0.9mm, p=0.0229) while there was no difference in the patients treated with glycine powder (estimated difference 0.1mm, 95%CI from -0.3 to 0.5mm, p=0.7333). VAS for pain during intervention and VAS for pain after one week were higher for patients treated with glycine powder (p=0.0056 and p=0.0339 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.