Peri-implant Mukozitisin Tedavisinde Mekanik Yaklaþýma Ýlave Klorheksidin Ýrrigasyonunun Klinik Etkinliði: Pilot Çalýþma

GÝRÝÞ ve AMAÇ: Bu pilot çalýþmada, peri-implant mukozitisin mekanik tedavisine ilave olarak antienfektif tedavi yaklaþýmý prensibi dahilinde klorheksidin içeren solüsyon ile cep irrigasyonu uygulamasýnýn klinik olarak deðerlendirilmesi amaçlandý
YÖNTEM ve GEREÇLER: Çalýþmaya en az bir yýldýr fonksiyonda olan en az bir dental implantýna peri-implant mukozitis teþhisi konmuþ 20 hasta dahil edildi. Hastalar her grupta 10 hasta olacak þekilde rastgele 2 gruba ayrýldý; bir gruba yalnýzca mekanik periodontal tedavi uygulanýrken diðer gruba mekanik tedaviye ilave olarak peri-implant oluðun klorheksidin solüsyon (%0,2) ile irrigasyonu gerçekleþtirildi. Baþlangýçta, 1. ve 3. aylarda doðal diþ bölgelerinde plak indeks, gingival indeks, sondalama derinliði (SD) ve sondalamada kanama (SK); implant bölgelerinde ise modifiye plak indeks, modifiye sulkus kanama indeksi, SD, SK ölçüldü. Ýmplant bölgelerinden kaðýt þeritler yardýmýyla peri-implant oluk sývýsý (PÝOS) toplandý ve Periotron ile hacimleri belirlendi.
BULGULAR: Her iki grupta da diþ ve implant bölgelerine ait klinik parametrelerin 1. ve 3. aylarda istatistiksel olarak anlamlý azalma gösterdiði tespit edildi (p<0,001). Ýki grup arasýnda klinik parametrelerde fark bulunmadý (p>0,05). Her iki grupta da PÝOS hacminde 1. ve 3. aylarda istatistiksel anlamlý azalma saptandý (p<0,001), ancak gruplar arasýnda herhangi bir fark tespit edilmedi (p>0,05).
TARTIÞMA ve SONUÇ: Peri-implant mukozitisin tedavisinde uygulanan mekanik tedavi ve mekanik tedaviye ilave klorheksidin irrigasyonu yaklaþýmlarýnýn klinik parametreler üzerinde olumlu etkilerinin olduðu ancak birbirine üstünlüðünün bulunmadýðý sonucuna varýldý.

Clinical Efficacy of Adjunctive Chlorhexidine Irrigation to Mechanical Approach in the Treatment of Peri-implant Mucositis: A Pilot Study

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of adjunctive chlorhexidine solution irrigation to mechanical treatment of peri-implant mucositis in accordance with the principle of anti-infective treatment.
METHODS: Twenty patients with at least 1 dental implant, that has been functioning for at least 1 year and diagnosed with peri-implant mucositis were included to the study. Patients were randomly divided into 2 groups with 10 patients in each group; one group received only mechanical periodontal treatment, while the other was irrigated with chlorhexidine solution (0.2%) in addition to mechanical treatment. Plaque index, gingival index, probing depth (PD) and bleeding on probing (BOP) were measured from tooth sites; modified plaque index, modified sulcus bleeding index, PD, BOP were recorded from implant sites at baseline, 1st and 3rd months after treatment. Peri-implant crevicular fluid (PICF) was collected from the implant sites with paper strips at baseline, first and third months after treatment. PICF volumes were determined with Periotron.
RESULTS: The clinical parameters of the tooth and implant sites in both groups showed significant reductions at 1st and 3rd months (p<0.001) without anydifference between the groups (p>0.05). PICF volume decreased significantly in both groups at 1st and 3rd months (p<0.001), however, no difference was found between the groups (p>0.05).
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: It was concluded that mechanical treatment and chlorhexidine irrigation adjunct to mechanical treatment have positive effects on clinical parameters in the treatment of peri-implant mucositis but none of them is superior to another.