Implant decontamination with 2% chlorhexidine during surgical peri-implantitis treatment: a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial

Y. C. M. de Waal*, G. M. Raghoebar, H. J. A. Meijer, E. G. Winkel, A. J. van Winkelhoff

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

73 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

ObjectiveThe objective of this randomized, double-blind, controlled trial was to evaluate the clinical, radiographic, and microbiological effects of implant surface decontamination with a 2% chlorhexidine (CHX) solution in comparison with a 0.12% chlorhexidine+0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) solution during resective surgical peri-implantitis treatment.

Material and methodsForty-four patients (108 implants) with peri-implantitis were treated with resective surgical treatment consisting of bone re-contouring, surface debridement and chemical decontamination, and apically repositioned flap. Patients were randomly allocated to decontamination with a 2% CHX solution (test group) or 0.12% CHX+0.05% CPC (control group). Clinical and radiographic parameters were recorded before treatment (baseline), and at 3, 6, and 12months after treatment. Microbiological parameters were recorded during surgery.

ResultsMultilevel analysis showed no significant differences in bleeding, suppuration, probing pocket depth, and radiographic bone loss between control and test group over three follow-up measurements (3, 6, and 12months) from baseline. Both decontamination procedures resulted in significant reductions in anaerobic bacterial counts on the implant surface, but no significant difference was noted between control and test group (mean log 3.372.34 vs. 3.65 +/- 2.87, P=0.99).

ConclusionsThe use of a 2% CHX solution for implant surface decontamination during resective peri-implantitis therapy does not lead to improved clinical, radiographic, or microbiological results compared with a 0.12% CHX+0.05% CPC solution. Overall, the additional use of CHX reduces anaerobic bacterial load on the implant surface better than mechanical debridement alone, but does not seem to enhance clinical treatment outcomes (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT01852253).

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1015-1023
Number of pages9
JournalClinical oral implant research
Volume26
Issue number9
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sept-2015

Keywords

  • chlorhexidine
  • decontamination
  • dental implants
  • microbiology
  • peri-implantitis
  • resective surgery
  • 3RD MOLAR SURGERY
  • ALVEOLAR OSTEITIS
  • ACTINOBACILLUS-ACTINOMYCETEMCOMITANS
  • TRANSPORT MEDIA
  • OPTIMAL DOSAGE
  • DENTAL PLAQUE
  • DIGLUCONATE
  • SURVIVAL
  • THERAPY
  • BIOFILM

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Implant decontamination with 2% chlorhexidine during surgical peri-implantitis treatment: a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this