Peri-implant evaluation in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients: a 3-year study

Peri-implant conditions and levels of advanced glycation end products among patients with different glycemic control

BACKGROUND

A close relationship between poor glycemic control and peri-implant break down has been demonstrated. It is hypothesized that levels of advanced glycation end products (AGEs) in peri-implant sulcular fluid (PISF) are higher with increased glycemic levels in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients.

PURPOSE

In the present study, we examined the clinical and radiographic peri-implant parameters and levels of AGEs among different glycemic levels in diabetic patients and assessed whether the levels of AGEs correlate with clinical peri-implant parameters.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ninety-three patients who participated in this study were divided into four groups; Group-1: HbA1c 6.1%-8%; Group-2: HbA1c 8.1%-10%; Group-3: HbA1c > 10%; Group-4: non-diabetic individuals with HbA1c < 6%. Peri-implant plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD) and crestal bone loss (CBL) were recorded. Levels of AGEs in PISF were quantified using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Between-group comparison of means was verified with Kruskal-Wallis test and Pearson correlation coefficient for correlations of AGE levels with peri-implant parameters.

RESULTS

Peri-implant PI, BOP, PD, and CBL were significantly higher in group-1, -2, and -3 as compared to non-diabetic patients (P < .05). These parameters were significantly higher in group-2 and group-3 versus group-1 (P < .01). Mean PI, BOP, PD, and CBL were comparable between group-2 and group-3 patients (P > .05). Mean levels of AGEs in PISF were significantly higher in relation to higher levels of HbA1c levels. Significant positive correlations were found between AGEs and PD (P = .0221) and CBL (P = .0425); and significant negative correlation was found for PI (P = .0376) in patients with HbA1c levels >10%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical and radiographic peri-implant parameters were poor and levels of AGEs were significantly high in patients with high glycemic levels. These findings suggest that AGEs may be considered as potential marker of inflammation in diabetic individuals with peri-implantitis.

To what extent should dental implant placement be adopted as a standard for diabetic patients?

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is considered one of the major chronic diseases in the world. Long-term hyperglycemia considerably affects the body tissues, and consequently, can lead to morbidity and mortality. Moreover, many oral complications have been observed with DM but little consideration in relation to the placement of dental implants has been investigated. Dental research has analyzed the relation of dental implants and bone osseointegration in diabetic patients. Theoretically, an impaired immune system and delayed wound healing of these patients might decrease the success rate of implant placement; however, with noticeable advances in evidence-based dentistry and statistically significant results, successful implant treatment could be achieved significantly in well-controlled diabetic patients.

Influence of implant location in patients with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus: 2-year follow-up

The aim of the present cross-sectional retrospective 2-year follow-up clinical study was to assess the influence of implant location on clinical and radiographic parameters around dental implants placed in patients with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Twenty-seven patients with T2DM and 25 non-diabetic controls were included. Implants were classified into three zones according to their location: (1) anterior zone: implant/s replacing anterior teeth, (2) middle zone: implant/s replacing premolars, and (3) posterior zone: implant/s replacing molars. Peri-implant bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), and crestal bone loss (CBL) were measured. P-values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. The mean age of patients with T2DM was 42.5 years and that of non-diabetic controls was 40.6 years. The mean fasting blood glucose levels of patients with and without T2DM were 74.5mg/dl (66-80mg/dl) and 82.5mg/dl (79-88.1mg/dl), respectively. The mean duration of T2DM was 4.3 years. There was no significant difference in BOP, PD, or CBL around implants placed in any of the zones in the jaws of patients with and without T2DM. There is no influence of implant location on clinical and radiographic parameters around dental implants placed in patients with and without T2DM.

Dental implants and diabetes mellitus-a systematic review

Dental implant surgery has developed to a widely used procedure for dental rehabilitation and is a secure and predictable procedure. Local and systemic risk factors can result in higher failure rates. Diabetes mellitus is a chronic disease that goes in with hyperglycemia and causes multifarious side effects. Diabetes as a relative contraindication for implant surgery is controversially discussed. Because the number of patients suffering from diabetes increases, there are more diabetic patients demanding implant procedures. We aimed to answer the PICO question "Do diabetic patients with dental implants have a higher complication rate in comparison to healthy controls?" by a systematic literature search based on the PRISMA statement. We identified 22 clinical studies and 20 publications of aggregated literature, which were quite heterogeneous concerning methods and results. We conclude that patients with poorly controlled diabetes suffer from impaired osseointegration, elevated risk of peri-implantitis, and higher level of implant failure. The influence of duration of the disease is not fully clear. The supportive administration of antibiotics and chlorhexidine seems to improve implant success. When diabetes is under well control, implant procedures are safe and predictable with a complication rate similar to that of healthy patients.

Influence of Glycemic Control on Peri-Implant Bone Healing: 12-Month Outcomes of Local Release of Bone-Related Factors and Implant Stabilization in Type 2 Diabetics

BACKGROUND

The poor glycemic status seems to be an important factor affecting implant complication rates, including peri-implant bone loss.

PURPOSE

This trial evaluated the influence of glycemic control of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients on implant stabilization and on the levels of bone markers in peri-implant fluid during the healing.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Systemically healthy patients (SH,n = 19), better-controlled T2DM (BCDM,n = 16), and poorly controlled T2DM (PCDM,n = 16) indicated for implant therapy were recruited. The implant stability quotient (ISQ) was determined at implant placement, 3, 6, and 12 months. Levels of transforming growth factor- β (TGF-β), fibroblast growth factor (FGF), osteopontin (OPN), osteocalcin (OC), and osteoprotegerin (OPG) in the peri-implant fluid were quantified at 15 days, and 3, 6, and 12 months, using the Luminex assay.

RESULTS

OPG and OPN levels were higher in SH at 12 months than at15 days (p < .05), whereas OC and TGF-β were lower in PCDM at 12 months compared with the 15-day and 3-month follow-ups, respectively (p < .05). Inter-group analyses showed lower OPN levels in PCDM compared with SH at 12 months (p < .05). The ISQ was higher at 12 months when compared with baseline and 3 months in SH (p < .05), whereas no differences were observed during follow-up in diabetics, regardless of glycemic control (p > .05). No difference in ISQ was observed among groups over time (p > .05).

CONCLUSION

Poor glycemic control negatively modulated the bone factors during healing, although T2DM, regardless of glycemic status, had no effect on implant stabilization.

Key systemic and environmental risk factors for implant failure

Dental implants are an important treatment option for patients interested in replacing lost or missing teeth. Although a robust body of literature has reviewed risk factors for tooth loss, the evidence for risk factors associated with dental implants is less well defined. This article focuses on key systemic risk factors relating to dental implant failure, as well as on perimucositis and peri-implantitis.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus and fracture risk

Increased fracture risk, traditionally associated with type 1 diabetes, has lately been of great concern in patients with type 2 diabetes. A variable increase in fracture risk has been reported, ranging from 20% to 3-fold, depending on skeletal site, diabetes duration and study design. Longer disease duration, the presence of diabetic complications, inadequate glycemic control, insulin use and increased risk for falls are all reported to increase fracture risk. Patients with type 2 diabetes display a unique skeletal phenotype with either normal or more frequently increased, bone mineral density and impaired structural and geometric properties. Recently, alterations in bone material properties seem to be the predominant defect leading to increased bone fragility. Accumulation of advanced glycation end-products and changes in collagen cross-linking along with suppression of bone turnover seem to be significant factors impairing bone strength. FRAX score has been reported to underestimate fracture risk and lumbar spine BMD is inadequate in predicting vertebral fractures. Anti-diabetic medications, apart from thiazolidinediones, appear to be safe for the skeleton, although more data are needed. Optimal strategies to reduce skeletal fragility in type 2 diabetic patients are yet to be determined.