Skip to content

Chlorhexidine Gel and Peribioma Periogel Use in Peri-implant Mucositis Sites: a Split-mouth Randomized Clinical Trial.

Clinical Comparison Between Chlorhexidine Gel and Peribioma Periogel in Patients With Peri-implant Mucositis: a Split-mouth Randomized Clinical Trial.

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04899986
Enrollment
20
Registered
2021-05-25
Start date
2021-05-15
Completion date
2022-01-16
Last updated
2022-01-31

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Peri-implant Mucositis

Keywords

non-surgical periodontal therapy

Brief summary

The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of non-surgical periodontal therapy with supportive home oral care for the treatment of peri-implant mucositis. Patients with bilateral implants with peri-implant mucositis will undergo professional dental hygiene with ultrasonic handpiece and manual scaler, followed by the application of glycine Airflow powders. Then, patients will be randomly divided into two groups: the Trial Group will undergo a split-mouth application of chlorhexidine gel 1% for quadrants 1 and 4 and of Biorepair Periogel 0.12% for quadrants 2 and 3, with one daily home application for the following 15 days after the visits and the use of Biorepair Parodontogel toothpaste; the control Group will not use any gels. The improvement of peri-implant mucositis will be evaluated between the two groups and differences between the two gels will be assessed, if present.

Detailed description

The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of non-surgical periodontal therapy with supportive home oral care for the treatment of peri-implant mucositis. Patients with bilateral implants with peri-implant mucositis will undergo professional dental hygiene with ultrasonic handpiece and manual scaler, followed by the application of glycine Airflow powders. Then, patients will be randomly divided into two groups: * Trial Group: split-mouth application of chlorhexidine gel 1% for quadrants 1 and 4 and of Biorepair Periogel 0.12% for quadrants 2 and 3. Home oral care will be continued with 1 application per day of the two gels for the following 15 days after the visits for the same quadrants, and the use of Biorepair Parodontogel Toothpaste. * Control Group: no application neither of chlorhexidine gel nor of Biorepair Periogel. The improvement of peri-implant mucositis will be evaluated between the two groups and differences between the two gels will be assessed, if present, evaluating periodontal indices at the baseline, after three months and after six months.

Interventions

OTHERChlorhexidine and Biorepair gel and toothpaste application

Split-mouth application of chlorhexidine gel 1% (quadrants 1 and 4) and Biorepair Periogel (quadrants 2 and 3) after professional dental hygiene. Home oral care will be continued with chlorhexidine 0,12% gel and Biorepair Periogel in the same quadrants, for the following 15 days from the visits, together with the use of Biorepair Parodontogel toothpaste.

Use of standard toothpastes for home oral hygiene.

Sponsors

University of Pavia
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
QUADRUPLE (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 70 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Adult patients (18-70 years) * Bilateral presence of peri-implant mucositis * Patients with high compliance

Exclusion criteria

* Patient with cardiac pacemaker * Patients suffering from psychological, neurological or psychiatric disorders * Patients suffering from systemic, metabolic or autoimmune diseases * Pregnant women

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change in BOP - Bleeding On ProbingBaseline, 1, 3 and 6 months.Dichotomous scoring (yes/no)
Change in GBI - Gingival Bleeding Index (percentage)Baseline, 1, 3 and 6 months.Site-specific assessment of the presence or absence of gum bleeding after the insertion of the periodontal probe for the detection of PPD, detected on 6 sites. The number of bleeding sites is divided per the total number of probed sites; the ratio is multiplied X 100.
Change in suppurationBaseline, 1, 3 and 6 months.Dichotomous scoring (yes/no)
Change in marginal mucosa conditionBaseline, 1, 3 and 6 months.Scoring criteria: * 0: normal mucosa * 1: minimal inflammation with color change and minor edema * 2: moderate inflammation with redness, edema and glazing * 3: severe inflammation with redness, edema, ulceration and spontaneous bleeding without probing
Change in mucosal marginBaseline, 1, 3 and 6 months.Dichotomous scoring (migrated/non migrated)
Probing Pocket DepthBaseline, 1, 3 and 6 months.Evaluation (in mm) of the depth of the gingival sulcus, through a millimeter periodontal probe; it is detected from the gingival margin to the bottom of the gingival sulcus or periodontal pocket, evaluated at 6 sites.
Change in PI - Plaque Index (percentage)Baseline, 1, 3 and 6 months.Evaluation of the presence of plaque on the 4 surfaces of teeth on the total amount of dental surfaces.
Change in BS - Bleeding ScoreBaseline, 1, 3 and 6 months.Scoring criteria: * 0: no bleeding * 1: isolated visible spots * 2: blood forms a confluent red line on mucosal margin * 3: heavy or profuse bleeding

Countries

Italy

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026