Trial reportInternational journal of implant dentistry2025
Treatment of peri-implant mucositis using an Er:YAG laser or an ultrasonic device: a randomized, controlled clinical trial.
Trial report in International journal of implant dentistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT05772299 (Treatment of Peri-implant Mucositis Using an Er), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Treatment of Peri-implant Mucositis Using an Er:Yag Laser or an Ultrasonic Device. A Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of Oral Hygiene Instructions in the Resolution of Peri-Implant Mucositis. A Randomized Controlled Trial.Clinical oral implants research · 2026Trial
- [Treatment of peri-implant mucositis using an erythritol air-polishing or ultrasonic device: A randomized controlled trial].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2026Trial
- Research advances in early diagnosis and treatment strategies for peri-implantitis: from microecology to regenerative therapy.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe study assessed the clinical outcomes following treatment of peri-implant mucositis using Er:YAG laser or an ultrasonic device over six months. Patients' experience of pain, aesthetics, and Quality of life were further assessed.
methodsOne dental implant, per included patient, diagnosed with peri-implant mucositis underwent treatment with an Er:YAG laser (test) or an ultrasonic scaler (control) randomly. Treatments were performed at baseline and months three and six. At each session, oral hygiene was instructed after plaque registration, and the patient was guided in proper cleaning technique using a toothbrush and interproximal aids as needed. Full mouth bleeding on probing (FMBoP), full mouth plaque score (FMPS), implant bleeding on probing (BoP), implant mean graded bleeding (mBI), implant probing pocket depts (PPD), implant suppuration and bone levels were assessed. Oral health-related Quality of life (OHQoL) and visual analog scales (VAS), which reflect aesthetic satisfaction and pain of the treatment, were also evaluated.
resultsForty-six patients were included. FMBoP was significantly reduced from 30.1 to 21.5% (test) (p < 0.001) respectively from 35.0% to 30% (control) (p < 0.01). FMPS showed significant reduction from 61.5 to 32.7% (test) (p < 0.001) and from 58.7 to 39.1% (control) (p < 0.001). At the implant BoP reduced from 89.0 to 55.7% (test) (p < 0.001) respectively from 94.9 to 63.7% (control) (p < 0.001). mBI was reduced from 1.3 to 0.6 (test) (p < 0.01) and from 1.9 to 0.8 (control) (p < 0.001). Distribution of "no bleeding" increased from 13 to 61% (test) (p < 0.05) and from 0 to 35% (control) (p < 0.05). At month three, statistically significant intergroup differences were shown for PPD ≥ 4 mm with 43.5% (test) respectively 73.9% (control) (p < 0.05). At month six, statistically significant intergroup differences, were shown for FMBoP 21.5% (test) respectively 30% (control) (p < 0.05) and for plaque score at the implant 4.0% (test) respectively 26% (control) (p < 0.05). Less pain was reported in the laser group at three days 0.08 (test) respectively 0.2 (control) (p < 0.05).
conclusionsTreatment of peri-implant mucositis was effective regardless of whether the treatment was performed with an Er:YAG laser or an ultrasonic scaler. Fewer diseased sites were diagnosed at six months following laser treatment.
trial registrationRegistered at www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov : study no, NCT05772299.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.