The aim of this study was comparing different lasers with conventional non-surgical treatment (CNT) for the management of peri-implantitis, regarding probing depth (PD), plaque index (PLI), clinical attachment level (CAL), and sulcus bleeding index (SBI). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on different lasers and CNT for peri-implantitis were searched. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were performed to analyze the PD, PLI, CAL, and SBI outcomes. The risk of bias, evidence quality, statistical heterogeneity, and ranking probability were also evaluated. Eleven studies were included in this study, involving three types of lasers. Diode + CNT had significantly superior efficacy to CNT alone, regarding PD reduction, while Er:YAG + CNT had significantly superior efficacy than CNT in terms of the PLI, CAL, and SBI. The highest probability of being most effective for PD was diode + CNT (49%), while Er:YAG + CNT had the highest probability of improving the PLI, CAL, and SBI (66%, 53%, and 79%, respectively). Diode + CNT was significantly superior for PD management in peri-implantitis compared with CNT alone, while Er:YAG + CNT significantly improved the PLI, CAL, and SBI. Therefore, Er:YAG + CNT might be recommended methods considered for management of peri-implantitis.
Keywords: Conventional non-surgical treatment; Lasers; Network meta-analysis; Peri-implantitis; Randomized controlled trial.