However, it is now thought that this will lead to less peri-implant mucositis being caused in all implant patients. Despite this, there have been concerns about the link between mouthwashes containing alcohol and the incidence of oral cancer.Some studies looked solely at interventions which contribute to the reversal of peri-implant mucositis. One such study found no statistically significant difference between triclosan dentrifice in comparison to sodium fluoride dentrifice at recovering soft tissue health. There were also two trials conducted where patients with peri-implant mucositis were assessed after different interventions carried out by dental professionals. In these trials mechanical debridement being followed by minocycline or chlorhexidine gel had no statistically significant difference, nor did debridement with titanium curettes compared to an ultrasonic debridement tool. Nouveau interventions
A double‐blind randomized controlled trial assessing the effect of subgingival ozone (O3, gaseous ozone, HealOzone MK II, KaVo) and/or hydrogen peroxide on the development of peri‐implant mucositis, found that ozone showed significant potential for management of peri-implant mucositis compared to oxygen and saline.Mechanical curettage with adjunct antimicrobial photodynamic therapy is more effective in reducing peri-implant inflammation in smokeless tobacco product users as compared to mechanical curettage alone in the short term (3 months). Further long-term studies will be needed to confirm long term efficacy.Current research found no evidence for use of systemic antibiotics in the treatment of peri-implant mucositis

Further Discussion
There is low quality evidence to suggest the most effective treatments for peri-implant mucositis, with no reliable evidence for which are more beneficial in the long term.
Failure to identify a peri-implant disease can lead to a complete loss of osseointegration and eventual loss of the implant.Though there are clear structural differences between dental implants and natural teeth, peri-implant health shares many common features with periodontal health around natural teeth. This is especially true with respect to their surrounding tissues and biological attachment.The diagnosis of peri-implant mucositis should be based on clinical signs of inflammatory disease, and radiographic assessment should be carried out to exclude bone level changes as this is an indication that peri-implant disease has already progressed to peri-implantitis stage. Clinical presentations to diagnose peri-implant mucositis include:--        Red, swollen and soft peri-implant tissues
-        Bleeding on probing (BoP) and/or suppuration on probing
-        Increased probing depths compared to baseline measurements
-        Absence of bone loss beyond crestal bone level changes as a result of initial remodelling following implant placement
It has been suggested that the soft tissue cuff surrounding implants are less resistant to probing than the gingiva at adjacent teeth sites. This potentially leads to mechanically induced BoP on dental implants that are clinically healthy, as a result of trauma-induced BoP rather than a sign of biofilm-induced inflammation which represent the presence of peri-implant disease.