Sub-Periosteal Peri-Implant Augmented Layer Technique to Treat Peri-Implantitis Lesions

Novel Flowchart Guiding the Non-Surgical and Surgical Management of Peri-Implant Complications: A Narrative Review

Peri-implant diseases, such as peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis, are induced by dysbiotic microbiota resulting in the inflammatory destruction of peri-implant tissue. Nonetheless, there has yet to be an established protocol for the treatment of these diseases in a predictable manner, although many clinicians and researchers have proposed various treatment modalities for their management. With the increase in the number of reports evaluating the efficacy of various treatment modalities and new materials, the use of multiple decontamination methods to clean infected implant surfaces is recommended; moreover, the use of hard tissue laser and/or air abrasion techniques may prove advantageous in the future. Limited evidence supports additional effects on clinical improvement in antimicrobial administration for treating peri-implantitis. Implantoplasty may be justified for decontaminating the implant surfaces in the supracrestal area. Surgical treatment is employed for advanced peri-implantitis, and appropriate surgical methods, such as resection therapy or combination therapy, should be selected based on bone defect configuration. This review presents recent clinical advances in debridement methods for contaminated implant surfaces and regenerative materials for treating peri-implant bone defects. It also proposes a new flowchart to guide the treatment decisions for peri-implant disease.

Minimal invasiveness in the reconstructive treatment of peri-implantitis defects

Peri-implantitis is a plaque-associated pathologic condition occurring in tissues around dental implants, clinically characterized by increased peri-implant probing pocket depth and progressive loss of supporting bone. Consequently, to arrest further disease progression and to increase the chance to obtain re-osseointegration, surgical reconstructive procedures have been adopted. In particular, following a paradigm gathered from periodontal therapy, recent protocols have underlined the importance of a minimally invasive approach to optimize the outcomes of therapy while minimizing the risks of postoperative complications. The present review summarizes the level of evidence on the surgical reconstructive protocols focusing on the new approaches aiming to minimize surgical trauma and patients' postoperative discomfort, underlining the pros and cons of each treatment modality.

Peri-implant bone augmentation by the sub-periosteal peri-implant augmented layer technique and a bovine-derived bone block: A case report

BACKGROUND

When used with deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) delivered as a particulate, the sub-periosteal peri-implant augmented layer (SPAL) technique was effective in completely correcting up to 92% of peri-implant buccal bone dehiscences. The use of a DBBM block (bDBBM), however, may result in an improvement of the peri-implant bone dehiscence as well as a relevant lateral bone augmentation since its mechanical properties may ensure a better dimensional stability at flap manipulation than particulate DBBM. The aim of the present a proof-of-principle case report is to investigate if SPAL may be successfully used to obtain bone augmentation at peri-implant dehiscence sites when used with bDBBM.

CASE PRESENTATION

Lateral bone augmentation was performed using the SPAL technique at two implants showing a buccal peri-implant bone dehiscence immediately after their placement. A partial-thickness flap was elevated, leaving the periosteal layer on the buccal cortical bone plate. The periosteal layer was, in turn, elevated to create a pouch, which was used to stabilize a bDBBM graft at the peri-implant buccal bone dehiscences. At re-entry, exposed implant surfaces were completely covered by new thick hard tissue up to their most coronal portion. A free epithelial-connective tissue graft was used to augment the peri-implant soft tissue phenotype.

CONCLUSION

When used to accommodate bDBBM over the most coronal portion of an exposed implant, SPAL may successfully lead to an increase in peri-implant buccal tissue thickness.

Peri-implant tissue conditions at implants treated with Sub-periosteal Peri-implant Augmented Layer technique: A retrospective case series

OBJECTIVES

To assess peri-implant tissue conditions on the short term in patients receiving the Sub-periosteal Peri-implant Augmented Layer (SPAL) technique and in patients with adequate thickness (≥2 mm) of the peri-implant buccal bone plate (PBBP) at placement.

METHODS

Patients where either a dehiscence defect or thin PBBP at implant placement was corrected by SPAL technique (SPAL_dehiscence and SPAL_thin groups, respectively) and patients presenting a residual PBBP thickness ≥2 mm at implant placement (control group) were retrospectively selected. The number of peri-implant sites positive to bleeding on probing (BoP) at 6 months following prosthetic loading was the primary outcome. Also, height of keratinized mucosa, marginal soft tissue level, Plaque Index, peri-implant probing depth, suppuration on probing, and interproximal radiographic bone level (RBL) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Thirty-four patients (11 in the SPAL_dehiscence group, 11 in the SPAL_thin group, and 12 in the control group) were included. In each SPAL group, 10 patients (90.9%) showed peri-implant tissue thickness ≥2 mm at the most coronal portion of the implant at uncovering. The prevalence (number) of BoP-positive sites was 2, 1, and 0 in the SPAL_dehiscence , SPAL_thin , and control groups, respectively. RBL amounted to 0.3 mm in the SPAL_dehiscence group, 0.2 mm in the SPAL_thin group, and 0 mm in the control group.

CONCLUSION

After 6 months of prosthetic loading, patients treated with SPAL technique show limited peri-implant mucosal inflammation in association with shallow PD and adequate KM. At implants receiving SPAL technique, however, interproximal RBL was found apical to its ideal position.