Objective The aim of this study was to compare the use of two chlorhexidine-based antimicrobial agents as an adjunct to mechanical therapy for the treatment of peri-implant mucositis. Materials and methods Thirty patients with peri-implant mucositis were included in the study and randomized in two groups. In addition to mechanical therapy, group A was treated with chlorhexidine 0.2% mouthwash, while group B was treated with chlorhexidine 1% gel. Probing depth, plaque index and bleeding index were recorded at each scheduled follow-up visit: ten days, 1 month and 3 months after giving the patients the assigned formulation. Patients had to fill in a questionnaire investigating their satisfaction and ease of use of the product. Results A total of 23 patients (13 in group A and 10 in group B) attended all the follow-up visits. Chlorhexidine 0.2% mouthwash and chlorhexidine 1% gel were equally useful in the treatment of peri-implant mucositis leading to the reduction in inflammatory parameters. Probing depth decreased over time in both groups. Patients showed preference for gel formulation even if they found it more difficult to use. Conclusions Adjunctive treatment with different chlorhexidine formulations was beneficial to the treatment of peri-implant mucositis. Besides, no differences could be found between 0.2% mouthwash and 1% gel.

Topical application of 1% chlorhexidine gel versus 0.2% mouthwash in the treatment of peri-implant mucositis. An observational study / F. De Siena, L. Francetti, S. Corbella, S. Taschieri, M. Del Fabbro. - In: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DENTAL HYGIENE. - ISSN 1601-5029. - 11:1(2013 Feb), pp. 41-47. [10.1111/idh.12002]

Topical application of 1% chlorhexidine gel versus 0.2% mouthwash in the treatment of peri-implant mucositis. An observational study

L. Francetti;S. Corbella;S. Taschieri;M. Del Fabbro
2013

Abstract

Objective The aim of this study was to compare the use of two chlorhexidine-based antimicrobial agents as an adjunct to mechanical therapy for the treatment of peri-implant mucositis. Materials and methods Thirty patients with peri-implant mucositis were included in the study and randomized in two groups. In addition to mechanical therapy, group A was treated with chlorhexidine 0.2% mouthwash, while group B was treated with chlorhexidine 1% gel. Probing depth, plaque index and bleeding index were recorded at each scheduled follow-up visit: ten days, 1 month and 3 months after giving the patients the assigned formulation. Patients had to fill in a questionnaire investigating their satisfaction and ease of use of the product. Results A total of 23 patients (13 in group A and 10 in group B) attended all the follow-up visits. Chlorhexidine 0.2% mouthwash and chlorhexidine 1% gel were equally useful in the treatment of peri-implant mucositis leading to the reduction in inflammatory parameters. Probing depth decreased over time in both groups. Patients showed preference for gel formulation even if they found it more difficult to use. Conclusions Adjunctive treatment with different chlorhexidine formulations was beneficial to the treatment of peri-implant mucositis. Besides, no differences could be found between 0.2% mouthwash and 1% gel.
Aged ; Anti-Infective Agents, Local ; Chlorhexidine ; Dental Implant-Abutment Design ; Dental Implants ; Dental Plaque ; Dental Plaque Index ; Dental Scaling ; Follow-Up Studies ; Gels ; Gingival Hemorrhage ; Humans; Middle Aged ; Mouthwashes ; Patient Satisfaction ; Periodontal Index ; Periodontal Pocket ; Stomatitis
Settore MED/28 - Malattie Odontostomatologiche
feb-2013
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/224631
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 6
  • Scopus 31
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 29
social impact