Peri-Implantitis
Conditions
Brief summary
the aim of the study is to compare between two non-surgical methods of treatment of peri-implantitis by using debridement and placing an healing abutment with electomagnetic field (MED-Magdent Miniaturized Device) in the test group and Sham healing abutment in the control group ( Sham MED).
Detailed description
Dental Implants are common alternative for replacement at the time of tooth loss. The two common methods for treatment implant with inflammation include surgical and global non-surgical treatment. The non-surgical treatment includes soft tissue debridement with various tools which including manual, ultrasonic rotators, lasers and delayed release devices. Using an electromagnetic field to induce bony healing in fractures and around implants is being investigated for studies and was found to be effective and safe. The electric field lowers osteoclasts activity, speeds up osteoid construction and stimulates creation blood vessels development. Forty patients who will attend to the department of periodontology at Rambam health care campus, at the School ofpostgraduate Dentistry, which will meet the research criteria, will be recruited. All patients will exhibit a moderate-onset gum infection around one of the implants.
Interventions
DEVICEMagdent Cap MED
Magdent is intended to be used for accelaration of soft tissue and bone healing
DEVICESham MED
Sham MED is intended to be used for soft tissue healing
Sponsors
Rambam Health Care Campus
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
20 Years to 85 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Written informed consent. * Patients of 20 - 85 years. * pocket depth of 5-8 mm and bone loss of 3-5mm Patients with fixed prosthodontics Implant with standart width
Exclusion criteria
* Heavy smokers (more than 10 cigarettes per day). * Pregnant women * active periodontal disease * Consumption of Non Steroidal Anti Inflammatory drugs
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change in the implant probing depth (IPD) | baseline, 4 weeks, 12 weeks | clinical measurement of the depth of the pocket around the implant in 6 sites |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| changing in the concentration of the RANKL cytokine | baseline, 2 weeks, 4 weeks, 12 weeks | Sampling the amount bycollecting gingival fluid with paper pins and examining the amount of the cytokine with ELISA (Enzyme Linked Immunoflorecance assay)asay |
Countries
Israel
Outcome results
None listed