The correlation between history of periodontitis according to staging and grading and the prevalence/severity of peri-implantitis in patients enrolled in maintenance therapy

Effectiveness of Implant Therapy in Patients With and Without a History of Periodontitis: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies

AIM

This systematic review investigates the effectiveness of implant therapy in patients with and without a history of periodontitis in terms of implant loss, peri-implant marginal bone loss (MBL), and occurrence of peri-implant diseases.

METHODS

The protocol of the present meta-analysis was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021264980). An electronic search was conducted up to April 2024. All prospective cohort studies reporting implant loss, MBL, and occurrence of peri-implant diseases in both patients with a history of periodontitis (HP) and patients with no history of periodontitis (NHP) after at least 36-month follow-up were included. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the quality of the evidence was also assessed. A meta-analysis was performed on the selected outcomes at the available follow-up time points. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on follow-up time, rate of progression and severity of periodontitis, and implant surface characteristics. Publication bias was evaluated using the Funnel plot and Egger's test.

RESULTS

From 13 761 initial records, 14 studies (17 articles) were finally included. Eight studies had a low risk of bias level, and six had a medium risk of bias level. Meta-analysis showed that HP patients had a significantly greater risk for implant loss (HR: 1.75; 95% CI: 1.28-2.40; p = 0.0005; I2 = 0%), MBL (MD: 0.41 mm; 95% CI 0.19, 0.63; p = 0.0002; I2 = 54%), and peri-implantitis (3.24; 95% CI: 1.58-6.64; p = 0.001; I2 = 57%) compared to NHP, whereas no significant intergroup difference for peri-implant mucositis was found. Subgroup analyses revealed a particularly greater risk for implant loss for HP patients over a ≥ 10-year follow-up (HR: 2.02; 95% CI: 1.06-3.85; p = 0.03; I2 = 0%) and for patients with a history of grade C (formerly aggressive) periodontitis (HR: 6.16; 95% CI: 2.53-15.01; p < 0.0001; I2 = 0%). A greater risk for implant loss for stages III-IV (severe) periodontitis, and implants with rough surfaces was also found.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limits of heterogeneous case definitions and methods of assessment, a history of periodontitis has been proved to significantly increase the risk for implant loss, particularly at long follow-up (≥ 10 years) and in case of rapidly progressive forms (grade C), and for MBL and peri-implantitis.

No association between periodontitis extent, severity, and progression rate with dental implant failure

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the relationship between extent, severity, and rate of progression of periodontitis with the implant outcome.

METHODS

Dental records of adult patients who had attended the dental clinics of the universities contributing data to the BigMouth network between 2011 and 2022 seeking implant therapy were evaluated. Patients' records were furthered examined for a periodontal diagnosis based on the 2017 World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases and Conditions. Patients were further categorized based on extent (generalized/localized), severity (stage I, II, III, IV), and rate of progression (grade A, B, C). Information including demographic characteristics, self-reported medical conditions, as well as the number of missing teeth were extracted from patients' electronic health records.

RESULTS

Records of 50,312 dental implants placed in 20,842 patients over a 12-year period were screened. Three hundred twenty-two records of implants were placed in patients with a recorded periodontitis diagnosis based on the 2017 periodontal classification. The mean age of the cohort was 57.53±12.95 years which consisted of 52.2 % males, 74.2 % non-Hispanic, 55.9 % white individuals, 9 % diabetics, 3.4 % tobacco users. The univariate analysis demonstrated that periodontitis extent, severity, and rate of progression were not significantly associated with the treatment outcome. The implant failure rate was estimated to be 5.6 %.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of this retrospective study that utilized records of dental implants placed in institutions in the United States contributing data to the BigMouth network, the implant failure rate was estimated to be 5.6 %. Periodontitis extent, severity, and rate of progression were not significantly associated with the implant treatment outcome.

Impact of smoking on cost-effectiveness of 10-48 years of periodontal care

The study aims were (1) to explore whether "periodontal treatment" consisting of surgical therapy (flap, resective, or regenerative) or scaling and root planing treatment with long-term periodontal maintenance treatment, is cost-effective in terms of preventing periodontitis-attributable tooth extraction and replacement by implant-supported crowns ("extraction/replacement"); (2) to assess the effect of cigarette smoking on this cost-effectiveness. Data for this observational retrospective study were collected from dental charts of patients who had received periodontal therapy and at least annual follow-up visits for >10 years were analyzed by linear regression generalized estimating equations and generalized linear models. Among 399 adults (199 males, 200 females), those with the least mean annual treatment cost experienced the greatest mean annual costs for extraction/replacement, indicating general cost-effectiveness. Cigarette smoking adversely impacted this cost-effectiveness, with current heavy smokers experiencing no cost-effectiveness. Former smokers with Grade C periodontitis benefitted most, whereas smoking did not influence cost-effectiveness for Grade B periodontitis. Assessed by mean annual costs of "extraction/replacement," periodontal treatment was cost-effective, which decreased in a dose-response manner by former and current smoking intensity. Cigarette smoking should be factored into treatment planning and cost-effective analyses of periodontal treatment. Smoking cessation should be encouraged.

The Influence of History of Severe Periodontitis on Estimated Long-Term Marginal Bone Loss around Implants Restored with Fixed Segmented Full-Arch Rehabilitation

The aim of this study was to analyze the long-term marginal bone level (MBL) of implants supporting fixed full-arch restoration in patients who had previously lost their dentition due to severe periodontitis. This retrospective study included 35 patients in whom 342 implants with internal tapered conical connections were placed. MBL was analyzed radiographically over time and a long-term estimation of MBL was calculated. A mixed linear model with abutment height, graft, diameter and location (maxilla/mandible) as factors and gender, age, implant length and prosthetic variables as covariates was used to evaluate the influence on MBL. MBL in these patients showed an estimator of predictions at 4108 days after loading of -0.307 mm, SE = 0.042. Only 0.15% of implants were radiographically affected with MBL of 3 mm or more. The mixed linear model results showed a main effect of the type of opposing dentition, gender, implant diameter, and abutment height. Particularly, an abutment height of 1 mm had associated larger MBL than the remaining heights. Thus, it can be concluded that dental implants restored with fixed segmented full-arch rehabilitation in patients with a history of severe periodontal disease do not suffer important marginal bone loss if some specific factors are considered, mainly the use of long transmucosal abutments (≥2 mm).

Outcome indicators of non-surgical therapy of peri-implantitis: a prospective case series analysis

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to identify patient and implant indicators influencing the non-surgical therapeutic outcomes of peri-implantitis at 6 months of follow-up.

METHODS

This case series involved patients with at least one implant diagnosed with peri-implantitis according to the 2017 World Workshop criteria. Non-surgical therapy consisted of mechanical debridement of the peri-implant pockets combined with metronidazole 500 mg 3 times a day for 7 days. At baseline and at 6 months, clinical and radiographic variables were collected to calculate treatment success (probing pocket depth reduction to 5 mm without bleeding on probing or < 5 mm irrespective of bleeding on probing at all implant sites, and lack of bone loss progression). The primary outcome was treatment success (%) at 6 months. The influence of the patient and implant/prosthetic variables upon disease resolution was assessed through simple and multiple logistic regression analyses at patient and implant level, using generalized estimation equations models.

RESULTS

A total of 74 patients and 107 implants were analyzed at 6 months. Disease resolution was established in 25.7% of the patients and 24.1% of the implants. Patients with stage IV and grade C periodontitis, inadequate oral hygiene at baseline, and wide diameter (≥ 4.5 mm) presented significantly greater treatment failure, whereas smokers and former smokers demonstrated a tendency toward failure. At 6 months, there was a significant decrease in probing pocket depth and bleeding on probing of 1.08 ± 1.06 mm and 14%, respectively. Radiographically, a significant gain in marginal bone level of 0.43 ± 0.56 mm was observed.

CONCLUSION

Disease resolution after non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis is negatively influenced by the loss of support of the adjacent periodontium, poor baseline oral hygiene, and wide diameter implants (≥ 4.5 mm).

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This study helps to discriminate the clinical situations in which non-surgical treatment is less likely to achieve treatment success at short term.

Metabolic Conditions and Peri-Implantitis

Dental implants to replace lost teeth are a common dentistry practice nowadays. Titanium dental implants display a high success rate and improved safety profile. Nevertheless, there is an increasing peri-implantitis (PI), an inflammatory disease associated with polymicrobial infection that adversely affects the hard and soft tissues around the implant. The present review highlights the contribution of different metabolic conditions to PI. The considerations of both local and systemic metabolic conditions are crucial for planning successful dental implant procedures and during the treatment course of PI. Un- or undertreated PI can lead to permanent jaw bone suffering and dental implant losses. The common mediators of PI are inflammation and oxidative stress, which are also the key mediators of most systemic metabolic disorders. Chronic periodontitis, low-grade tissue inflammation, and increased oxidative stress raise the incidence of PI and the underlying systemic metabolic conditions, such as obesity, diabetes mellitus, or harmful lifestyle factors (cigarette smoking, etc.). Using dental biomaterials with antimicrobial effects could partly solve the problem of pathogenic microbial contamination and local inflammation. With local dentistry considering factors, including oral microbiota and implant quality control, the inclusion of the underlying systemic metabolic conditions into the pre-procedure planning and during the treatment course should improve the chances of successful outcomes.

Effect of thermal osteonecrosis around implants in the rat tibia: numerical and histomorphometric results in context of implant removal

The purpose of this rat study was to explore the feasibility of in vivo temperature thresholds affecting bone contact at the implant surface. Based on these data, thermal necrosis should be used for implant removal in the subsequent in vivo study. Rat tibiae of 48 animals at one site were randomly treated with heat or cold before implant insertion. Temperatures of 4 °C, 3 °C, 2 °C, 48 °C, 49 °C and 50 °C for a tempering time of 1 min were evaluated. Numerical simulations of the heat source-implant-bone system were carried out. Effects were assessed by histomorphometrical measurements. The results showed that the selected method of direct tempering using a tempering pin was suitable for maintaining a uniform layer around the pin. Starting at warm temperatures of 48 °C and rising to 50 °C, the BIC ratio revealed declining values and a significant difference was observed when comparing 50 °C to the control group (p = 0.03). However, there were no significant variations within the cold temperatures. This study pinpointed temperature discovered that could lead to the thermo-explantation and so that the number of samples used in future studies on temperature-induced bone necrosis can be reduced to a minimum. Significant BIC value reduction was seen at a temperature of 50 °C for 1 min.

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.

Correlation Analysis of miR-1246 Expression in Saliva of Patients with Chronic Periodontitis and Periodontal Indexes, Inflammatory Cytokines, and Protease Molecules

Objective. The study aimed to investigate the correlation of miR-1246 in saliva with periodontal indicators, inflammatory cytokines, and protease molecules in patients with chronic periodontitis. Methods. Thirty-five patients with chronic periodontitis were included as the chronic periodontitis group, and 35 healthy individuals were selected as the healthy control group during the same period. The miR-1246 levels, inflammatory cytokine interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-6, IL-17, tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), matrix metalloproteinase (MMP-1), MMP-8, and MMP tissue inhibitor (TIMP-1) in saliva were determined, and periodontal indexes, including the plaque index (PLI), bleeding index (BI), periodontal probing depth (PD), and attachment loss (AL) were examined. Results. The salivary levels of miR-1246, IL-1β, IL-6, IL-17, TNF-α, MMP-1, MMP-8, and TIMP-1 and the periodontal indexes PLI, GI, PD, and AL in the chronic periodontitis group were significantly higher than those in the healthy control ( $P<0.05$ ). Salivary levels of miR-1246 in patients with chronic periodontitis were positively correlated with the levels of IL-1β, IL-6, IL-17, TNF-α, MMP-1, MMP-8, TIMP-1, PLI, GI, PD, and AL ( $P<0.05$ ). Conclusion. Abnormally elevated levels of miR-1246 in saliva of patients with chronic periodontitis correlate with levels of periodontal indices, inflammatory cytokines, and protease molecules.

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.