Long‐term impact of patients' compliance to peri‐implant maintenance therapy on the incidence of peri‐implant diseases: An 11‐year prospective follow‐up clinical study

Periodontal conditions of teeth adjacent to dental implants with or without peri-implantitis after non-surgical therapy in patients treated for periodontitis: A retrospective study

OBJECTIVES

To retrospectively assess the periodontal conditions of teeth adjacent to and contralateral to implants presenting with or without peri-implantitis, following non-surgical periodontal and peri-implant mechanical therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred and one patients with existing dental implants and chronic periodontitis, who underwent non-surgical periodontal and peri-implant mechanical therapy, were included. The periodontal clinical probing depth (PPD), gingival recession (GR), and bleeding on probing (BOP) were recorded at six sites around the adjacent (Adj-) teeth and the contralateral (CL-) teeth relative to the implant. The potential factors influencing the periodontal conditions of 316 teeth were analyzed by multivariate linear regression models with generalized estimating equation methods and α = .05.

RESULTS

The PPD of Adj-teeth was significantly different from that of CL-teeth before and after non-surgical therapy when the implant was diagnosed with peri-implantitis (PI) (p < .05). The PPD of teeth was shown to be affected by neighboring implants diagnosed with peri-implantitis (β = .825 mm, p < .001), teeth adjacent to implants (β = .245 mm, p = .004), a molar tooth type (β = .435 mm, p = .019), and non-surgical therapy (β = -.522 mm, p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Relatively compromised periodontal conditions at Adj-teeth after non-surgical PI therapy were detected. Therefore, clinicians should be aware that non-surgical therapy may be less successful at teeth adjacent to implants with PI.

Supportive therapy following peri-implantitis treatment: A retrospective study on compliance

BACKGROUND

The compliance rate with supportive therapy following peri-implantitis treatment (SPIT) remains unknown. The present retrospective study was carried out to assess the compliance rate and the factors influencing compliance in a private practice setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients were divided into three groups according to compliance rate: regular compliance (RC ≥2 SPIT/year), erratic compliance (EC <2 SPIT/year), and non-compliance (NC <1 SPIT/year). Overall, 17 patient- (n = 8) and site-related variables (n = 9) were explored as potential confounders of compliance. The Chi2 test was applied to assess the association between categorical variables and determine the odds ratio (OR).

RESULTS

The study comprised 159 patients restored with 1075 implants, of which 469 were treated for peri-implantitis and met the inclusion criteria. A total of 57.2% were RC, 25.8% EC, and 17% NC. The multivariate analysis showed that smoking and grade C periodontitis reduced the likelihood of RC (OR = 0.28, p < .001) when compared to complete edentulism or non-smoking. Moreover, age demonstrated being associated with follow-up when SPIT was interrupted in EC and NC (OR = 0.94, p = .007).

CONCLUSION

Comprehensive information, provided prior to peri-implantitis treatment, regarding the importance of adhering to SPIT after peri-implantitis treatment to achieve/maintain peri-implant health, resulted in ~60% regular compliance rate (NCT05772078).

Systemic antibiotics in the surgical treatment of peri-implantitis: A randomized placebo-controlled trial

AIM

To study the clinical, radiographic and microbiological outcomes after surgical treatment of peri-implantitis, with or without adjunctive systemic antibiotics.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eighty-four patients (113 implants) with peri-implantitis were randomized into three groups (A, amoxicillin and metronidazole; B, phenoxymethylpenicillin and metronidazole; or C, placebo). Treatment included resective surgery and implant surface decontamination with adjunctive antibiotics or placebo. Primary outcomes were probing pocket depth (PPD) reduction and marginal bone level (MBL) stability. Secondary outcomes were treatment success (defined as PPD ≤ 5 mm, bleeding on probing [BOP] ≤ 1site, absence of suppuration on probing [SOP] and absence of progressive bone loss of >0.5 mm), changes in BOP/SOP, mucosal recession (REC), clinical attachment level (CAL), bacterial levels and adverse events. Outcomes were evaluated for up to 12 months. The impact of potential prognostic indicators on treatment success was evaluated using multilevel logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 76 patients (104 implants) completed the study. All groups showed clinical and radiological improvements over time. Statistically significant differences were observed between groups for MBL stability (A = 97%, B = 89%, C = 76%), treatment success (A = 68%, B = 66%, C = 28%) and bacterial levels of Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans and Tannerella forsythia, favouring antibiotics compared to placebo. Multiple regression identified antibiotic use as potential prognostic indicator for treatment success. Gastrointestinal disorders were the most reported adverse events in the antibiotic groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjunctive systemic antibiotics resulted in additional improvements in MBL stability. However, the potential clinical benefits of antibiotics need to be carefully balanced against the risk of adverse events and possible antibiotic resistance.

Etiology, pathogenesis and treatment of peri-implantitis: A European perspective

Peri-implantitis is a plaque-associated pathological condition occurring in tissues around dental implants. It is characterized by inflammation in the peri-implant mucosa and progressive loss of supporting bone. Over the last 30 years, peri-implantitis has become a major disease burden in dentistry. An understanding of the diagnosis, etiology and pathogenesis, epidemiology, and treatment of peri-implantitis must be a central component in undergraduate and postgraduate training programs in dentistry. In view of the strong role of European research in periodontology and implant dentistry, the focus of this review was to address peri-implantitis from a European perspective. One component of the work was to summarize new and reliable data on patients with dental implants to underpin the relevance of peri-implantitis from a population perspective. The nature of the peri-implantitis lesion was evaluated through results presented in preclinical models and evaluations of human biopsy material together with an appraisal of the microbiological characteristics. An overview of strategies and outcomes presented in clinical studies on nonsurgical and surgical treatment of peri-implantitis is discussed with a particular focus on end points of therapy and recommendations presented in the S3 level Clinical Practice Guideline for the prevention and treatment of peri-implant diseases.

Customized Subperiosteal Implants for the Rehabilitation of Atrophic Jaws: A Consensus Report and Literature Review

(1) Background: The aim was to perform a literature review on customized subperiosteal implants (CSIs) and provide clinical guidelines based on the results of an expert consensus meeting held in 2023. (2) Methods: A literature search was performed in Pubmed (MEDLINE) in July 2023, including case series and cohort studies with a minimum follow-up of 6 months that analyzed totally or partially edentulous patients treated with CSIs. Previously, an expert consensus meeting had been held in May 2023 to establish the most relevant clinical guidelines. (3) Results: Six papers (four case series and two retrospective cohort studies) were finally included in the review. Biological and mechanical complication rates ranged from 5.7% to 43.8% and from 6.3% to 20%, respectively. Thorough digital planning to ensure the passive fit of the CSI is mandatory to avoid implant failure. (4) Conclusions: CSIs are a promising treatment option for rehabilitating edentulous patients with atrophic jaws; they seem to have an excellent short-term survival rate, a low incidence of major complications, and less morbidity in comparison with complex bone grafting procedures. As the available data on the use of CSIs are very scarce, it is not possible to establish clinical recommendations based on scientific evidence.

Influence of the level of compliance with preventive maintenance therapy upon the prevalence of peri-implant diseases

BACKGROUND

A study was made to evaluate peri-implant conditions in compliers and erratic compliers with peri-implant maintenance therapy (PIMT), and to assess the role of site-specific confounders.

METHODS

Erratic PIMT compliers (EC) were defined as presenting attendance < 2×/year, while regular compliers (RC) attended ≥ 2×/year. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) were employed to perform a multivariable multilevel analysis in which the peri-implant condition was established as dependent variable.

RESULTS

Overall, 86 non-smoker patients (42 RC and 44 EC) attending the Department of Periodontology of the Universitat Internacional de Catalunya were recruited consecutively on a cross-sectional basis. The mean period of loading was 9.5 year. An implant placed in an erratic patient has 88% higher probability of presenting peri-implant diseases versus RC. Furthermore, the probability of diagnosis of peri-implantitis was significantly higher in EC versus RC (odds ratio [OR] 5.26; p = 0.009). Among other factors, history of periodontitis, non-hygienic prosthesis, period of implant loading, and modified plaque index (mPI) at implant level were shown to significantly increase the risk of peri-implantitis diagnosis. Although not associated with peri-implantitis diagnosis risk, keratinized mucosa (KM) width, and vestibular depth (VD) were significantly associated to plaque accumulation (mPI).

CONCLUSIONS

Compliance with PIMT was found to be significantly associated with peri-implant condition. In this sense, attending PIMT < 2×/year may be ineffective to prevent peri-implantitis.

The referral pattern and treatment modality for peri-implant disease between periodontists and non-periodontist dentists

OBJECTIVES

This study is to investigate the referral pattern and treatment modality of dentists in the management of peri-implant diseases between periodontists and non-periodontist dentists (NPDs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 167 validated questionnaires were obtained from periodontists and NPDs, who had experience of placing implants for at least one year. Question I to IV asked how the dentist would respond if a patient came for treatment of their peri-implant diseases with four different scenarios according to resource of patient and disease severity. For each Scenario, dentists also replied which treatment procedures they would use if they decide to treat the patient.

RESULTS

Periodontal training, resource of patient, and disease severity were shown to significantly influence the referral pattern and treatment modality in the management of peri-implant disease (p < 0.05). Periodontists were more likely to use variable treatment procedures, including occlusal adjustment (OR = 2.283, p < 0.01), oral hygiene instruction (OR = 3.751, p < 0.001), topical antiseptic agent (OR = 2.491, p < 0.005), non-surgical mechanical therapy (OR = 2.689, p < 0.001), surgical therapy (OR = 2.009, p < 0.01), and remove implant (OR = 3.486, p < 0.001) to treat peri-implant diseases, compared to NPDs.

CONCLUSION

The periodontal specialty training, resource of patient, and disease severity significantly influenced the referral pattern and treatment modality of dentist treating an implant diagnosed with peri-implant disease. This study also highlighted the importance of educating basic periodontal and peri-implant disease-related knowledge to all dentists regularly performing dental implant treatments.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Peri-implant diseases are highly prevalent among patients with dental implants. Periodontal specialty training could enhance using variable treatment procedures to treat peri-implant diseases for dentists.