The impact of a change in classification criteria on the prevalence of peri-implantitis: A cross-sectional analysis

Operating microscope-assisted reconstructive strategy for peri-implantitis: A case series report

BACKGROUND

Treating peri-implantitis with reconstructive means has been largely unpredictable due to access limitations for surface decontamination, unfavorable bony topography, difficulty in achieving wound stability, and inferior soft tissue qualities. A microsurgical approach with the use of the operating microscope (OM) that provides adjustable higher magnification (∼5-30 times) and coaxial illumination, coupled with the use of microsurgical instruments, may overcome, or alleviate some of the abovementioned obstacles, resulting in more predictable outcomes.

METHODS

Three patients received reconstructive therapy for correcting peri-implant defects under OM in private practice settings. After precise incisions to preserve soft tissue volume, the flaps were dissected prudently from underlying granulomatous tissues, which were subsequently removed, followed by controlled flap releasing under ∼10-15x magnification. Surface decontamination was performed using a piezoelectric ultrasonic device, air polishing, and hand instruments at ∼30x magnification. The biomaterial selections were dehydrated human de-epithelialized amnion-chorion membrane with mineralized allograft particulates in two cases and xenografts in one case, based on the surgeons' preference. Wound closure followed the non-submerged approach.

RESULTS

These cases demonstrated uneventful soft tissue healing, favorable radiographic bone fill, and disease resolution with follow-ups ranging from 2 to 4 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Preliminary data suggest encouraging outcomes after the microsurgical approach following biological as well as biomechanical principles for peri-implant defect reconstruction.

Risk Indicators of Peri-Implant Diseases in Public and Private Clinics: A Multicenter Study

Methods

Patients examined during postloading maintenance visits were included in this study. The presence of peri-implant mucositis, peri-implantitis and several patient- and implant-related independent variables was recorded. Statistical analysis was performed using the logistic regression analysis. The odds ratios (OR) of the potential association between each variable and the occurrence of peri-implant diseases were evaluated.

Results

Among the 114 participants with 403 implants, peri-implantitis was found in at least one implant of nine individuals (7.89%), and a total of 13 implants were affected by peri-implantitis (3.22%). The univariate regression analysis revealed a statistically significant association between arch (OR = 4.81; 95% CI = 1.27-31.36) and soft tissue thickness (OR = 4.07; 95% CI = 1.33-13.73) with the occurrence of peri-implantitis. The multivariate analysis confirmed the significant impact of soft tissue thickness (OR = 3.60; 95% CI = 1.16-12.24).

Conclusion

The occurrence of peri-implant diseases can be influenced by various factors. However, in order to accurately identify risk indicators, it is necessary to conduct long-term prospective studies.

The economic and societal impact of periodontal and peri-implant diseases

Periodontal and peri-implant diseases result from a chronic inflammatory response to dysbiotic microbial communities and are characterized by inflammation in the soft tissue and the ensuing progressive destruction of supporting bone, resulting in tooth or implant loss. These diseases' high prevalence, multifactorial etiology, extensive treatment costs, and significant detriment to patients' quality-of-life underscore their status as a critical public health burden. This review delineates the economic and sociocultural ramifications of periodontal and peri-implant diseases on patient welfare and healthcare economics. We delve into the implications of diagnosis, treatment, supportive care, and managing destructive tissue consequences, contrasting these aspects with healthy patients.

The Use of Enamel Matrix Derivative during Surgical Therapy for Peri-Implantitis: A Case Series

Peri-implantitis is a growing concern and currently, there is no agreement on the best method for treating this condition. This study looked at surgical intervention with the use of enamel matrix derivative (EMD) for treating this condition. A cohort of 25 (34 implants) consecutive patients treated with EMD for peri-implantitis was followed for up to 6.4 years. The survival of the implants as well as changes in clinical parameters are reported. Statistical analysis was performed using paired t tests and general estimating equations. The mean length of time implants were followed post-surgery was 3.05 ± 1.53 years. All but two of the treated implants survived in function (94%). Both failed implants were lost in the same patient, who was a heavy smoker. The changes in mean probing depth (1.94 ± 1.18 mm), change in deepest probing depth (3.12 ± 1.45 mm), and reduction in bleeding on probing (73.6 ± 43.9%) according to patient means were all highly significant (p < 0.001 for all changes). When EMD is used during surgical treatment of peri-implantitis, there is a high survival rate of implants and significant improvements in clinical parameters.

The influence of implant position and of prosthetic characteristics on the occurrence of peri-implantitis: a retrospective study on periapical radiographs

OBJECTIVE

The present retrospective study aimed to investigate the influence of malposition on the occurrence of peri-implantitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study included clinical records of systemically healthy patients with single and partial implant-supported rehabilitations and at least 1-year post-loading follow-up. The parameters collected included implant-related factors, patient-related factors, site-related factors, and prosthesis-related factors. The radiographic measurements were taken by using a dedicated software and the diagnosis of peri-implantitis was made based on all the available clinical and radiographic data. Descriptive statistics were provided for all variables. Following an exploratory approach, an implant-level analysis of factors influencing the occurrence of peri-implantitis was done through a multilevel multivariate logistic regression (mixed).

RESULTS

A total of 180 implants belonging to 90 subjects were randomly selected. Malposition showed no statistically significant association with the occurrence of peri-implantitis. According to the multi-level analysis, the parameters that were significantly associated with peri-implantitis included presence / history of periodontitis (OR = 5.945, 95% CI: 1.093 - 32.334, P = 0.039) and presence of an emergence profile angle ≥ 45° (OR = 9.094, 95% CI: 2.017 - 40.995, P = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Implant malposition, as defined following Buser's criteria (2004), did not influence the occurrence of peri-implantitis in the selected cohort. Conversely, history of periodontitis and presence of a prosthetic emergence profile with an angle ≥ 45° were correlated to an increased risk of peri-implantitis.

Survival analysis of implants after surgical treatment of peri-implantitis based on bone loss severity and surgical technique: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Few trials have compared the results of surgical treatment for peri-implantitis based on severity of peri-implantitis and surgical method. This study investigated the survival rate of implants based on type of surgical method used and initial severity of peri-implantitis. Classification of severity was determined based on bone loss rate relative to fixture length.

METHODS

Medical records of patients who underwent peri-implantitis surgery from July 2003 to April 2021 were identified. Classification of peri-implantitis was divided into 3 groups (stage 1: bone loss < 25% (of fixture length), stage 2: 25% < bone loss < 50%, stage 3: bone loss > 50%) and performance of resective or regenerative surgery was investigated. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox hazards proportional models were used to analyze the cumulative survival rate of implants. Median survival time, predicted mean survival time, hazard ratio (HR), and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

Based on Kaplan-Meier analysis, 89 patients and 227 implants were included, and total median postoperative survival duration was 8.96 years. Cumulative survival rates for stage 1, 2, and 3 were 70.7%, 48.9%, and 21.3%, respectively. The mean survival time for implants in stage 1, 2, and 3 was 9.95 years, 7.96 years, and 5.67 years, respectively, with statistically significant difference (log-rank p-value < 0.001). HRs for stage 2 and stage 3 were 2.25 and 4.59, respectively, with stage 1 as reference. Significant difference was not found in survival time between resective and regenerative surgery groups in any peri-implantitis stage.

CONCLUSIONS

The initial bone loss rate relative to the fixture length significantly correlated with the outcome after peri-implantitis surgery, demonstrating a notable difference in the long-term survival rate. Difference was not found between resective surgery and regenerative surgery in implant survival time. Bone loss rate could be utilized as a reliable diagnostic tool for evaluating prognosis after surgical treatment, regardless of surgical method used.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Retrospectively registered. (KCT0008225).

Effect of mechanical instrumentation with adjunct photodynamic therapy on salivary TNFα levels and clinical periodontal and peri‑implant status in patients with depression: A randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the present randomized controlled trial was to assess the effect of mechanical instrumentation (MI) with adjunct photodynamic therapy (PDT) on salivary tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNFα) levels and clinical periodontal and peri‑implant status in patients with depression.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In groups 1 and 2, individuals with periodontal and peri‑implant diseases with and without depression, respectively were included. Group-3 comprised of systemically healthy individuals with a healthy periodontal and peri‑implant status. In groups 1 and 2, patients in the test- and control groups received MI with and without PDT respectively. Periodontal and peri‑implant probing depth and plaque and gingival indices were measured. Radiographic evaluation was done at baseline. Whole salivary tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα) in peri‑implant sulcular fluid were measured at baseline. The clinical and immunological parameters were reassessed at 120 days' follow-up. Level of significance was set at P<0.05.

RESULTS

Thirty-four, 36 and 37 implants were in function in groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively. At baseline, periodontal and peri‑implant clinical parameters and TNFα levels were significantly higher in groups 1 (P<0.05) and 2 (P<0.05) than Group-3. At 4-months follow-up, there was no difference in periodontal and peri‑implant clinical parameters in the test- and control groups among individuals in groups 1 and 3. In Group-2, there was a significant reduction in periodontal (P<0.05) and peri‑implant (P<0.05) clinical parameters at 4-months follow-up than baseline. In Group-2, there was no significant difference in these parameters among patients in the test- and control-groups.

CONCLUSION

In patients with depression clinical periodontal and peri‑implant status is poorer and salivary TNFα levels are higher after MI with or without PDT. In healthy patients, PDT offers no additional benefits in the treatment of periodontal inflammation.

What is the prevalence of peri-implantitis? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Peri-implantitis is a usual finding but estimates of its prevalence fluctuate very much. This may be due to the wide variety of disease definitions. This systematic review aims to estimate the overall prevalence of peri-implantitis and the effect of different study designs, function times and use of probing depth on prevalence rate.

Methods

Following electronic and manual searches of the literature published from January 2005 to December 2021, data were extracted from the studies fitting the study criteria. Fifty-seven articles were included in this study.

Results

Prevalence of peri-implantitis was 19.53% (95% CI 12.87–26.19) at the patient-level, and 12.53% (95% CI 11.67–13.39) at the implant-level and it remains highly variable even following restriction to the clinical case definition. The use of probing depth like diagnostic criteria affected the prevalence data.

Conclusion

The results indicate that it remains essential the identification of the diagnostic markers for more accurate disease classification.

Comparison of Two Risk Assessment Scores in Predicting Peri-Implantitis Occurrence during Implant Maintenance in Patients Treated for Periodontal Diseases: A Long-Term Retrospective Study

Background: There is a need for reliable risk assessment tools to better predict peri-implantitis occurrence. This study compared the long-term prognosis value of two models of risk assessment scoring in predicting peri-implantitis. Methods: Seventy-three patients with treated periodontitis representing 232 implants and attending long-term implant maintenance were evaluated. The Periodontal Risk Assessment (PRA) score, which combines only periodontal risk factors/indicators, and the Implant Risk Assessment (IRA) score, which combines both periodontal and implant risk factors/indicators, were calculated during implant maintenance. Peri-implantitis was defined by the presence of probing depth ≥6 mm with bleeding on probing/suppuration and bone level ≥3 mm. Analyses were performed at the patient level. Results: The mean implant follow-up was 6.5 years. Peri-implantitis incidence was 17.8%, and high-risk PRA and IRA percentages were 36.9% and 27.3%, respectively. High-risk PRA and IRA were significantly associated with peri-implantitis incidence, with hazard ratio (HR) = 4.8 and 3.65, respectively. Risk factors/indicators considered separately showed reduced associations with peri-implantitis. Conclusions: The PRA score combining periodontal parameters and IRA score combining both periodontal and implant parameters have comparable value in predicting peri-implantitis. These scores could allow practicians to intercept the risk of peri-implantitis and to manage follow-up modalities in patients with treated periodontitis.

Influence of Periodontitis, Implant, and Prosthesis Characteristics on the Peri-Implant Status: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background

The association between peri-implant diseases and the periodontal, implant, and prosthesis characteristics has been characterized in various ways.

Purpose

The aim of this study was to evaluate the link between the peri-implant and periodontal status and the influence of implant and prosthesis parameters during implant follow-up.

Materials and Methods

One hundred and seven patients with a total of 310 implants that had at least one year of function who were attending periodontal and implant maintenance at a university clinic setting were included in this cross-sectional study. The demographic, periodontal, peri-implant tissue, implant, and prosthesis parameters were recorded. A pocket depth > 4 mm with bleeding on probing defined periodontal/peri-implant soft tissue diseased sites. Analyses were performed at the patient and implant levels using univariable and multivariable mixed regression analysis.

Results

The mean implant follow-up was 7.22 years. At the patient level, the bleeding on probing and pocket depth measurements were more pronounced around the implant than around the teeth. The opposite was observed for plaque and the clinical attachment levels. At the implant level, multivariable analysis showed that the periodontal and corresponding peri-implant tissue parameters, such as diseased sites, were closely related. The implant location, bone level, and number were selectively associated with the implant bone level, while cemented retention and emergence restoration profile influenced the implant pocket depth.

Conclusions

The present study suggested that clinical peri-implant and periodontal soft tissue statuses were different, which could be a consequence of the initial implant and prosthesis healing process. However, during implant follow-up, the peri-implant parameters were predominantly associated with their corresponding periodontal parameters regardless of an association with the implant and prosthesis characteristics. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03841656.

Ultraviolet Treatment of Titanium to Enhance Adhesion and Retention of Oral Mucosa Connective Tissue and Fibroblasts

Peri-implantitis is an unsolved but critical problem with dental implants. It is postulated that creating a seal of gingival soft tissue around the implant neck is key to preventing peri-implantitis. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of UV surface treatment of titanium disks on the adhesion strength and retention time of oral connective tissues as well as on the adherence of mucosal fibroblasts. Titanium disks with a smooth machined surface were prepared and treated with UV light for 15 min. Keratinized mucosal tissue sections (3 × 3 mm) from rat palates were incubated for 24 h on the titanium disks. The adhered tissue sections were then mechanically detached by agitating the culture dishes. The tissue sections remained adherent for significantly longer (15.5 h) on the UV-treated disks than on the untreated control disks (7.5 h). A total of 94% of the tissue sections were adherent for 5 h or longer on the UV-treated disks, whereas only 50% of the sections remained on the control disks for 5 h. The adhesion strength of the tissue sections to the titanium disks, as measured by tensile testing, was six times greater after UV treatment. In the culture studies, mucosal fibroblasts extracted from rat palates were attached to titanium disks by incubating for 24, 48, or 96 h. The number of attached cells was consistently 15–30% greater on the UV-treated disks than on the control disks. The cells were then subjected to mechanical or chemical (trypsinization) detachment. After mechanical detachment, the residual cell rates on the UV-treated surfaces after 24 and 48 h of incubation were 35% and 25% higher, respectively, than those on the control surfaces. The remaining rate after chemical detachment was 74% on the control surface and 88% on the UV-treated surface for the cells cultured for 48 h. These trends were also confirmed in mouse embryonic fibroblasts, with an intense expression of vinculin, a focal adhesion protein, on the UV-treated disks even after detachment. The UV-treated titanium was superhydrophilic, whereas the control titanium was hydrophobic. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) chemical analysis revealed that the amount of carbon at the surface was significantly reduced after UV treatment, while the amount of TiOH molecules was increased. These ex vivo and in vitro results indicate that the UV treatment of titanium increases the adhesion and retention of oral mucosa connective tissue as a result of increased resistance of constituent fibroblasts against exogenous detachment, both mechanically and chemically, as well as UV-induced physicochemical changes of the titanium surface.

Rough Dental Implant Surfaces and Peri-Implantitis: Role of Phase-Contrast Microscopy, Laser Protocols, and Modified Home Oral Hygiene in Maintenance. A 10-Year Retrospective Study

The aim of this study was to evaluate two different kinds of rough implant surface and to assess their tendency to peri-implantitis disease, with a follow-up of more than 10 years. Data were obtained from a cluster of 500 implants with Ti-Unite surface and 1000 implants with Ossean surface, with a minimum follow-up of 10 years. Implants had been inserted both in pristine bone and regenerated bone. We registered incidence of peri-implantitis and other causes of implant loss. All patients agreed with the following maintenance protocol: sonic brush with vertical movement (Broxo), interdental brushes, and oral irrigators (Broxo) at least two times every day. For all patients with implants, we evaluated subgingival plaque samples by phase-contrast microscopy every 4 months for a period of more than 10-years. Ti-Unite surface implants underwent peri-implantitis in 1.6% of the total number of implants inserted and Ossean surface implants showed peri-implantitis in 1.5% of the total number of implants. The total percentage of implant lost was 4% for Ti-Unite surfaces and 3.6% for Ossean surfaces. Strict control of implants leads to low percentage of peri-implantitis even for rough surfaces dental implants.