RESUMO
Background: Dental implant peri-implant mucositis is a prevalent complication that can lead to implant failure if left untreated. Various management techniques have been proposed, but their comparative effectiveness remains unclear of dental implant peri-implant mucositis. Materials and Methods: A total of 120 patients with peri-implant mucositis were randomly assigned to one of four treatment groups: Group A received mechanical debridement alone, Group B received mechanical debridement with adjunctive antiseptic mouthwash, Group C underwent laser therapy, and Group D received a combination of mechanical debridement and systemic antibiotics. Clinical parameters, including bleeding on probing (BOP), probing pocket depth (PPD), and plaque index (PI), were recorded at baseline and after a three-month follow-up period. Results: At the three-month follow-up, significant improvements were observed in all treatment groups. However, Group D, which received a combination of mechanical debridement and systemic antibiotics, showed the most substantial reduction in BOP (mean reduction of 78.2%), PPD (mean reduction of 2.5 mm), and PI (mean reduction of 1.7). Group C, treated with laser therapy, demonstrated the second-best outcomes with a mean reduction of 65.4% in BOP, 2.0 mm in PPD, and 1.3 in PI. Groups A and B showed moderate improvements, with no statistically significant differences between them. Conclusion: This randomized controlled trial (RCT) suggests that a combination of mechanical debridement and systemic antibiotics (Group D) is the most effective treatment for managing dental implant peri-implant mucositis, yielding superior clinical outcomes compared to other techniques.
RESUMO
This article is a literature review of mental health concerns in non-oncologic urology patients. Pathologies represented in this review include Peyronie's Disease (PD), erectile dysfunction (ED), urinary incontinence and urinary tract infections (UTI), infertility, benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), kidney stones, and urinary retention. While there has been great interventional focus as of late for urogenitary malignancies (i.e. prostate cancer awareness with the Movember campaign), literature studies and intervention focused on non-oncologic urology patients has been limited. As such, we conducted a review on urology patients with non-oncologic pathologies as an effort to increase clinician awareness of mental health concerns among such patients, increase the comfort level for clinician communication on socially sensitive topics surrounding pathologies, and review ongoing interventions conducted within these pathologies. We outlined different ongoing Mental Health Illness (MHI) needs and treatments for various pathologies. Patients with non-cancerous urologic pathologies had lower quality of life and higher incidence of MHI than the general population. As such, in line with the American Urological Association recommendations, psychological and social support from peers, therapists, and healthcare providers further prove to be crucial for some subpopulations. The review also yielded pathology specific interventions such as group therapy for ED patients. Given the higher incidence of MHI in the patient population after the Covid-19 pandemic, MHI awareness in the sphere of non-oncologic urology treatment continues to be crucial when creating a collaborative treatment platform for patients.
