Trial reportScientific reports2026
Efficacy of different nonsurgical treatments for peri-implantitis: a multi-arm randomized controlled clinical trial.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Peri-implantitis remains a challenging biofilm-associated condition, and the comparative effectiveness of adjunctive nonsurgical decontamination approaches is still unclear. This randomized, assessor-blinded, multi-arm clinical trial evaluated the clinical performance of different local submarginal decontamination protocols used alone or in combination with mechanical instrumentation in the management of early peri-implantitis lesions. Eighty implants from 26 patients were allocated to five treatment groups: mechanical instrumentation alone, mechanical instrumentation combined with chlorhexidine irrigation, ozone application, or glycine powder air abrasion, and glycine powder air abrasion as monotherapy. Clinical parameters, including probing pocket depth, bleeding on probing, and modified plaque index, were assessed at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months, and analyzed using linear mixed-effects models accounting for clustering at the patient level. All treatment modalities resulted in significant clinical improvements over 6 months. The greatest numerical reductions in probing depth, bleeding on probing, and plaque index were observed when mechanical instrumentation was combined with glycine powder air abrasion; however, no statistically significant differences were detected among treatment groups. These findings suggest that nonsurgical mechanical instrumentation, with or without adjunctive approaches, can provide meaningful short-term improvements in early peri-implantitis, while adjunctive glycine powder air abrasion may offer additional clinical benefits without demonstrating clear overall superiority.
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.