Table 5 Included studies—nonsurgical treatment of peri-implant mucositis: adjunctive antibiotic therapy

Schenk et al. [16]

RCT Split-mouth design

8 patients

PD >4 mm BOP on at least 1 site per implant ± mucosal hyperplasia no radiographic bone loss

3 months

Supra-/subgingival scaling (steel curettes) + polishing (rubber cup) + locally delivered tetracycline HCl (25 %) fibre for 10 days +0.2 % CHX mouthrinse twice for 10 days

Supra-/subgingival scaling (steel curettes) + polishing (rubber cup) + +0.2 % CHX mouthrinse twice for 10 days

ΔBOP (3 months, subject level)

24 implants

Test: −17 ± 25 %

1 implant type (endossous part: titanium and zirconoxide/transmucosal part: titanium oxinitride)

Control: 15 ± 37 %

PD/CAL values without significant changes in both groups

No adverse events

Partial/complete fibre loss at three sites

Hallström et al. [19]

RCT, parallel

45 patients

PD ≥4 mm BOP + and/or pus

6 months

OHI + mechanical cleansing (titanium curettes + rubber cups + polishing paste) + Azithromycin® 500 mg day 1 and 250 mg days 2–4

OHI + mechanical cleansing (titanium curettes + rubber cups + polishing paste)

Test

3 implant systems

Radiographic bone loss ≤2 mm

BOP: 82.6 (24.4) (BL) to 27.3 (18.8) % (6 months, subject level)

PD at worst site: 5.5 (0.8) (BL) to 4.1 (1.2) mm (6 months, subject level)

Control

BOP: 80.0 (25.0) (BL) to 47.5 (32.3) % (6 months, subject level)

PD at worst site: 5.7 (0.8) (BL) to 4.9 (1.1) mm (6 months, subject level)

Odds ratio of a positive treatment outcome (PD ≤ 4.0 mm and BOP ≤ 1) was 4.5:1 (test vs. control)

Comparable reductions in bacterial counts