Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2021 Jan 18:11:541752.
doi: 10.3389/fphar.2020.541752. eCollection 2020.

Efficacy of Probiotics as Adjunctive Therapy to Nonsurgical Treatment of Peri-Implant Mucositis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Rui Zhao  1 , Huimin Hu  1 , Yan Wang  1 , Wenli Lai  1 , Fan Jian  1
Affiliations
Review

Efficacy of Probiotics as Adjunctive Therapy to Nonsurgical Treatment of Peri-Implant Mucositis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Rui Zhao et al. Front Pharmacol. .

Abstract

Background: Peri-implant mucositis (PiM) is an inflammation of the soft tissues surrounding the dental implant and is the precursor of the destructive inflammatory peri-implantitis. PiM is usually reversible, but difficult to eradicate. Mechanical debridement (MD) is the conventional procedure to treat PiM although not enough to reach a complete resolution. Recently, probiotics have been considered in the treatment of peri-implant disease. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the efficacy of the probiotic therapy combined with MD compared with MD alone or MD + placebo in patients with PiM. Methods: A search using electronic databases (MEDLINE, Science Direct databases, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and a manual search were performed up to November 2019 by two reviewers independently of each other. Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing MD + probiotic vs. MD were included. The quality assessment for all the selected RCTs was conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Probing depth reduction was selected as the primary outcome. Weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated for continuous outcomes, and odds ratio (OR) and 95% CI were calculated for dichotomous outcomes, using random effect models. This review was registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42020213625). Results: Five eligible publications were included in this systematic review and four in the meta-analysis. As regards the implant, the WMD in the probing depth reduction between the test and control group was -0.12 mm [95% CI (-0.38, 0.14), p = 0.38], meaning that the adjunctive probiotic therapy was not improving PiM compared with MD alone or MD + placebo. The meta-analysis also showed no statistically significant results in the secondary outcomes (reduction of full mouth plaque index and full mouth bleeding on probing, absence of bleeding on probing at implant level, and changes in microorganism load and species). Conclusion: The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggested that the additional use of probiotics did not improve the efficacy of MD in PiM treatment regarding clinical and microbial outcomes, at least in a short-term.

Keywords: adjunctive treatment; nonsurgical treatment; peri-implant mucositis; probiotic; systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

This study was supported by grants from the Science and Technology Department of Sichuan Province (No. 2018SZ0232). The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Flow chart of the literature search and inclusion criteria.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Quality assessment of the selected studies (The Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing risk of bias).
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
Forest plot of PD reduction at implant level at 3 months.
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 4
(A) Forest plot of BOP absence at implant level at 3 months. (B) Forest plot of the overall FMPI reduction at 3 months. (C) Forest plot of the overall FMBOP reduction at 3 months.
FIGURE 5
FIGURE 5
Forest plot of the microorganism load regarding the established subgroups: (A) P. gingivalis; (B) P. intermedia; (C) T. forsythia; (D) F. nucleatum.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Ahmedbeyli D. R., Seyidbekov O. S., Dirikan I. S., Mamedov F. Y., Ahmedbeyli R. M. (2019). Efficacy of probiotic application in the treatment and prevention of peri-implant mucositis. Stomatologiia (Mosk) 98 (4), 20–24. 10.17116/stomat20199804120 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Augthun M., Conrads G. (1997). Microbial findings of deep peri-implant bone defects. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants 12, 106–112. - PubMed
    1. Casado P. L., Aguiar T., Fernandes Pinheiro M. P., Machado A., da Rosa Pinheiro A. (2019). Smoking as a risk factor for the development of preimplant diseases. Implant Dent. 28 (2), 120–124. 10.1097/ID.0000000000000876 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ciancio S. G., Lauciello F., Shibly O., Vitello M., Mather M. (1995). The effect of an antiseptic mouthrinse on implant maintenance: plaque and peri-implant gingival tissues. J. Periodontol. 66 (11), 962–965. 10.1902/jop.1995.66.11.962 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cochrane Collaboration (2019). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0. London, United Kingdom:Cochrane Collaboration.