# Peri-Implantitis Therapy Using Surgical Methods:
## 3 Results
### Effect of Intervention on Probing Pocket Depth  
PPD was measured in all the interventions in periodic examinations during the study period. The results demonstrated that PPD significantly decreased, compared to that of baseline, by \(\sim\)44.8%, \(\sim\)60.7%, \(\sim\)30.8%, \(\sim\)37.9%, and 37.5% in the [PERSON] et al. [25], [PERSON] et al. [31], [PERSON] et al. [32], [PERSON] et al. [33], and [PERSON] et al. [34] studies, respectively (Figure 2). The results of the [PERSON] et al. study [25] demonstrated  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{p{56.9 pt} p{56.9 pt} p{56.9 pt} p{56.9 pt} p{56.9 pt} p{56.9 pt}} \hline \hline
**Study** & **[25]** & **[31]** & **[32]** & **[33]** & **[34]** \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Plaque score} & \multirow{2}{*}{Decreased plaque score by 70\%} & \multirow{2}{*}{No change in plaque} & \multirow{2}{*}{Decreased plaque score by 43.6%, 20\%, and -38.7%, compared to that of baseline in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively, at the final period of review.} & \multirow{2}{*}{Decreased plaque score by 67.5\%} & \multirow{2}{*}{Decreased plaque score by \(\sim\)38.5\% and -53.6\%, compared to that of baseline in groups 1 and 2, 2, and 3, respectively, at the final period of review.} & \multirow{2}{*}{Decreased plaque score by 67.5\%} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(\sim\)53.6\%, compared to that of baseline in groups 1 and 2, 2, and 3, respectively, at the final period of review.} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(\sim\)53.6\%, compared to that of baseline in groups 1 and 2, 2, and 3, respectively, at the final period of review.} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(\sim\)1 and 2, 2} \\ \cline{1-1}  & & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Supputation} & \multirow{2}{*}{Decrease of superuration occurrence compared to that of baseline by 19.9\% and 22.7\% in groups 1 and 2, respectively, at the final period of the review.} & \multirow{2}{*}{Decrease of superuration occurrence compared to that of baseline by 26.1\%, 20\%, and 72.2\% in groups 1 and 2, respectively, at the final period of the review.} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(\sim\)1, 20\%, and 72.2\% in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively, at the final period of the review.} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(\sim\)1, 20\%, and 72.2\% in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively, at the final period of review.} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(\sim\)1, 20\%, and 72.  
that PPD decreased in both groups 1 (bone substitute material + membrane) and 2 (bone substitute material), in which PPD in group 1 decreased by 44.6 and 46.4% after one- and five-year treatments, respectively, while in group 2, these values were 43.3 and 45%, respectively. [PERSON] et al. [31] demonstrated that the mean PPD values decreased by 60.1% after one-year treatment, while this value after two- and three-year treatments was 60.7%. The difference in the PPD from pretreatment to one, two, and three years after treatment was statistically significant (\(p<0.01\)). [PERSON] et al. [33] demonstrated that the difference in PPD prior- and post-treatment was statistically significant (\(p\leq 0.001\)). The highest mean reduction of PPD was found to be 5.4 mm. The surgical procedure in this study was pocket epithelium and granulation tissue removal, osteoplasty, implantoplasty, and apically positioned flap. [PERSON] et al. [32] reported that the lowest mean reduction of PPD was 1.87 mm in peri-implantitis patients treated with a combination of treatments, including OFD, CAD, and SCTG [32]. Also, [PERSON] et al. [34] demonstrated that using the combination of CM + bone substitute, compared to CGF + bone substitute, was more efficient in decreasing PPD values by 25.9% and 9.6%, respectively; however, both treatment modalities were found to be efficient in decreasing the PPD values, in which PPD in group 1 decreased by 37.1% and 35.6% at year one and year three post-surgery, respectively, while these values for group 2 were 50.1% and 39.4%, respectively (\(p<0.05\)) [34].