Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 29, 2025
Effects of Mechanical Methods Used in Peri-implantitis Treatment on Implant Surface Decontamination and Roughness
Published on: March 14, 2025
Is Implantoplasty Efficacious at Treating Peri-Implantitis? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Rafael Paschoal Esteves Lima1, Lucas Guimarães Abreu1, Fernanda Vieira Belém1
1Faculty of Dentistry, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Purpose:
Peri-implantitis is an inflammatory disease, characterized by the progressive loss of the peri-implant support bone tissue. The objective of this study was to assess whether implantoplasty is efficacious in promoting peri-implant health.
Methods:
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, a search without restrictions regarding language or date of publication was conducted across different databases. Grey literature search, Google Scholar search and manual searches were also carried out. Studies evaluating periimplant clinical parameters of individuals with peri-implantitis who had been submitted to implantoplasty were included. Study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were conducted. The outcome variables were implant probing depth, the percentage of implants with bleeding on probing or suppuration on probing, and the success rate of implants after implantoplasty. The predictor variable was implantoplasty and the follow-up time after implantoplasty. Data on sample size, implant location, implant diameter, and diagnostic criteria for peri-implantitis were also collected during data extraction. Meta-analysis, sensitivity analysis, and analysis of the probability of implant success after implantoplasty with the Kalan-Meier method were performed.
Results:
Ninety-four studies were assessed. Eight articles were included and 7 were incorporated into quantitative analyses. Subjects' mean age ranged between 50 to 70.7 years. The studies demonstrated that implantoplasty contributed to a significant improvement in the peri-implant condition, reducing the probing depth, bleeding and suppuration on probing. Overall, the included studies exhibited low risk of bias. Meta-analysis demonstrated that probing depth before implantoplasty was significantly higher than after implantoplasty (mean difference = -3.37 mm, confidence interval = -4.74; -2.00). This result was confirmed in the sensitivity analysis. The probability of success of implants at 6 months of follow-up after implantoplasty was 97.5% and at 24 months of follow-up was 94.7%.
Conclusions:
There is some evidence in the literature to recommend implantoplasty as a potential treatment for periimplantitis.
