Implants With and Without Laser-Microtextured Collar: A 10-Year Clinical and Radiographic Comparative Evaluation

Prevalence of Peri-Implant Mucositis, Peri-Implantitis and Associated Risk Indicators of Implants with and without Laser-Microgrooved Collar Surface: A Long-Term (≥20 Years) Retrospective Study

The aim of the current study was to retrospectively investigate the prevalence of peri-implant mucositis (PIM) and peri-implantitis (P) in a long-term follow-up (≥20 years) of implants with the same body design and body surface but different collar surfaces with laser-microtextured grooves (LMGSs) vs. no laser-microtextured grooves (no-LMGSs) in private practice patients. Furthermore, several patient-related, implant-related, site-, surgical-, and prosthesis-related potential disease risk factors were analyzed. A chart review of patients receiving at least one pair of implants (one with an LMGS and the other without LMGS) in the period 1993-2002 was used. Chi-square analysis was used to determine if a statistically significant difference between the investigated variables and PIM/P was present. Possible risk factors were statistically evaluated by a binary logistic regression analysis. A total of 362 patients with 901 implant-supported restorations (438 with LMGS and 463 no-LMGS) were included in the study. The cumulative survival rates of implants at 5, 10, 15, and 20 years were 98.1%, 97.4%, 95.4%, and 89.8%, respectively, for the LMGS group, and 93.2%, 91.6%, 89.5%, and 78.3% for the no-LMGS group. The difference was statistically significant at all timepoints (p < 0.05). In total, at the end of the follow-up period, 45.7% of patients and 39.8% of implants presented PIM, and 15.6% of patients and 14% of implants presented P. A total of 164 LMGS implants (37.4%) and 195 no-LMGS implants (42.1%) presented peri-implant mucositis, while 28 (6.3%) of LMGS implants and 98 (21.1%) no-LMGS implants demonstrated peri-implantitis. Differences between LMGS implants and no-LMGS implants were statistically significant (p < 0.05). The binary logistic regression identified collar surface, cigarette smoking, histories of treated periodontitis, and lack of peri-implant maintenance as risk factors for P. After at least 20 years of function in patients followed privately, LMGS implants compared to no-LMGS implants presented a statistically and significantly lower incidence of P. Implant collar surface, cigarette smoking, previously treated periodontitis, and lack of peri-implant maintenance are factors with significant association to P.

Immediate placement and loading of implants with laser-microgrooved collar in combination with an anorganic porcine bone mineral matrix in the esthetic zone. Twelve-month results of a prospective multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

Many techniques have been proposed to address post-extraction ridge resorption, which often represents a concern, especially in the esthetic region.

PURPOSE

The purpose of the present, prospective, multicenter, single cohort study was to investigate, up to 1 year of function, the effectiveness of a protocol for alveolar ridge preservation involving implants with laser-microgrooved surface immediately placed in fresh extraction sockets.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty eight patients candidate to tooth extraction in the esthetic zone (site 15-25 and 35-45) were treated by immediate placement of a single laser-microgrooved implants with the adjunct of a highly porous anorganic porcine bone mineral matrix and a collagen wound dressing. Peri-implant marginal bone level (MBL) was evaluated at time of loading, 3 and 12 months after loading. Gingival index, plaque index, probing depth, and bleeding on probing were measured at 3, 6, and 12 months after loading. Dimensional changes at implant sites were digitally evaluated using the best-fit superimposition of pre-and post-socket preservation models. Implant aesthetic score (IAS) as well as patients' post-operative quality of life were also evaluated at 12 months. Comparisons between data relative to thick and thin gingival phenotypes were made using Student's t-test or Mann-Whitney test, as appropriate. The significance level was set at p = 0.05.

RESULTS

No patient dropped out, and 28 implants were evaluated at 12 months post-loading. The overall MBL was found to be 0.92 ± 1.11 mm. Volumetric analysis of superimposed models showed an alveolar bone tissue displacement at the buccal aspect of -0.57 ± 0.52 mm in thin phenotypes and -0.46 ± 0.31 mm in thick phenotypes (p = 0.58, unpaired Student's t-test). No signs of soft tissue recession or esthetically unpleasant buccal gingiva were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical protocol herein employed showed benefits in maintaining marginal bone levels and soft tissue contour around post-extraction implants in the esthetic zone.

Influence of rough micro-threaded and laser micro-textured implant-neck on peri-implant tissues: A systematic review

Background and objective

This systematic review aimed to explore clinical outcomes of marginal or crestal bone level (MBL) and soft tissue status around implants, following the placement of rough micro-threaded/laser-microtextured surface (LMS) implants. These outcomes are compared with those following the placement of smooth machined-neck implants.

Materials and methods

Using EBSCO Information Services, we conducted a web-based search of databases such as the PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE, for relevant English-language scientific papers published between January 2013 and August 2022. Prospective or retrospective controlled cohort studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the role of rough micro-threaded/LMS implant necks on MBL, sulcular probing depth (PD), and/or clinical attachment loss, were included in this review.

Results

From a comprehensive literature search of 247 articles, 6 RCTs, 5 prospective studies, and 4 retrospective studies (n = 15) fulfilled the eligibility criteria. MBL with rough micro-threaded implant necks ranged from 0.12 ± 0.17 mm to 3.25 ± 0.4 mm after loading. The smooth machined-neck implants without a micro-threaded neck had a loading MBL of 0.38 ± 0.51 mm to 3.75 ± 0.4 mm. Micro-threaded implant necks showed much lower MBL than machined-neck implants. LMS implant necks had a lower peri-implant PD than machined-neck implants after 3 years of early loading (2.3 ± 0.7 mm vs. 3.8 ± 0.8 mm). The experimental and control groups showed similar gingival recessions (1.08 ± 0.4 mm vs. 2.46 ± 0.3 mm). Meta-analysis was not feasible owing to heterogeneity of the studies.

Conclusion

Under functional loading, a roughened micro-threaded design for the implant neck could significantly lower MBL. Furthermore, PD and MBL were much lower around LMS neck implants than those around machined-neck or micro-threaded implants.

What is the influence of implant surface characteristics and/or implant material on the incidence and progression of peri-implantitis? A systematic literature review

OBJECTIVES

To answer the focused question, 'In animals or patients with dental implants, does implant surface characteristics and/or implant material have an effect on incidence and progression of peri-implantitis?'

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Pre-clinical in vivo experiments on experimental peri-implantitis and clinical trials with any aim and design, and ≥5 years follow-up, where the effect of ≥2 different type of implant material and/or surface characteristics on peri-implantitis incidence or severity, and/or progression, implant survival or losses due to peri-implantitis, and/or marginal bone levels/loss was assessed.

RESULTS

Meta-analyses based on data of pre-clinical experiments, using the ligature induced peri-implantitis model in the dog, indicated that after the spontaneous progression phase implants with a modified surface showed significantly greater radiographic bone loss (effect size 0.44 mm; 95%CI 0.10-0.79; p = .012; 8 publications) and area of infiltrated connective tissue (effect size 0.75 mm² ; 95%CI 0.15-1.34; p = .014; 5 publications) compared to non-modified surfaces. However, in 9 out of the 18 included experiments, reported in 25 publications, no significant differences were shown among the different implant surface types assessed. Clinical and/or radiographic data from 7605 patients with 26,188 implants, reported in 31 publications (20 RCTs, 3 CTs, 4 prospective cohort, and 4 retrospective studies; 12 with follow-up ≥10 years), overall did not show significant differences in the incidence of peri-implantitis, when this was reported or could be inferred, among the various implant surfaces. In general, high survival rates (90-100%) up to 30 years and no clinically relevant differences in marginal bone loss/levels, merely compatible with crestal remodelling, were presented for the various implant types.

CONCLUSION

Pre-clinical in vivo experiments indicate that surface characteristics of modified implants may have a significant negative impact on peri-implantitis progression, while clinical studies do not support the notion that there is a difference in peri-implantitis incidence among the various types of implant surfaces. No assumptions can be made regarding the possible impact of implant material on incidence and/or peri-implantitis progression due to limited information.