Ten-year results of a three arms prospective cohort study on implants in periodontally compromised patients. Part 2: clinical results

Genetic polymorphisms of inflammatory and bone metabolism related proteins in a population with dental implants of the Basque Country. A case-control study

BACKGROUND

Peri-implantitis (PI) is a frequent inflammatory disorder characterised by progressive loss of the supporting bone. Not all patients with recognised risk factors develop PI. The aim of this study is to evaluate the presence of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) of inflammatory and bone metabolism related proteins in a population treated with dental implants from the Basque Country (Spain).

METHODS

We included 80 patients with diagnosis of PI and 81 patients without PI, 91 women and 70 men, with a mean age of 60.90 years. SNPs of BMP-4, BRINP3, CD14, FGF-3, FGF-10, GBP-1, IL-1α, IL-1β, IL-10, LTF, OPG and RANKL proteins were selected. We performed a univariate and bivariate analysis using IBM SPSS® v.28 statistical software.

RESULTS

Presence of SNPs GBP1 rs7911 (p = 0.041) and BRINP3 rs1935881 (p = 0.012) was significantly more common in patients with PI. Patients with PI who smoked (> 10 cig/day) showed a higher presence of OPG rs2073617 SNP (p = 0.034). Also, BMP-4 rs17563 (p = 0.018) and FGF-3 rs1893047 (p = 0.014) SNPs were more frequent in patients with PI and Type II diabetes mellitus.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that PI could be favoured by an alteration in the osseointegration of dental implants, based on an abnormal immunological response to peri-implant infection in patients from the Basque Country (Spain).

Influence of an allogenic collagen scaffold on implant sites with thin supracrestal tissue height: a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

This randomized clinical trial focused on patients with thin peri-implant soft-tissue height (STH) (≤ 2.5 mm) and investigated the impact of an allogenic collagen scaffold (aCS) on supracrestal tissue height and marginal bone loss (MBL).

MATERIAL & METHODS

Forty patients received bone level implants and were randomly assigned to the test group with simultaneous tissue thickening with aCS or the control group. After three months, prosthetic restoration occurred. STH measurements were taken at baseline (T0) and reopening surgery (TR), with MBL assessed at 12 months (T1). Descriptive statistics were calculated for continuous variables, and counts for categorical variables (significance level, p = 0.05).

RESULTS

At T1, 37 patients were available. At T0, control and test groups had mean STH values of 2.3 ± 0.3 mm and 2.1 ± 0.4 mm. TR revealed mean STH values of 2.3 ± 0.2 mm (control) and 2.6 ± 0.7 mm (test), with a significant tissue thickening of 0.5 ± 0.6 mm in the test group (p < 0.03). At T1, control and test groups showed MBL mean values of 1.1 ± 0.8 mm and 1.0 ± 0.6 mm, with a moderate but significant correlation with STH thickening (-0.34), implant position (0.43), history of periodontitis (0.39), and smoking status (0.27).

CONCLUSION

The use of an aCS protocol resulted in soft tissue thickening but did not reach a threshold to reliably reduce MBL compared to the control group within the study's limitations.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Peri-implant STH is crucial for maintaining peri-implant marginal bone stability. Marginal bone stability represents a crucial factor in prevention of peri-implantitis development. German register of clinical trial registration number DRKS00033290.

The role of the general dental practitioner in the implant journey

The relationship between referring dentist and implantologist can be crucial in making the treatment journey as efficient and effective as possible for patients. There are a number of considerations to discuss to allow effective communication of options with the patient, as well as the long-term management of these cases once returned to general practice.

Maintenance of peri-implant health in general dental practice

The long-term maintenance or restoration of peri-implant tissues' health depends on the strategic implementation of preventive measures and interventions. These measures should be initiated before implant placement and continued throughout a patient's lifetime, as part of a tailored and comprehensive supportive peri-implant care (SPIC) programme. Central to the clinical efforts of maintaining and rehabilitating peri-implant tissues are several key factors, including the ongoing assessment and frequent monitoring of tissue health and stability, proactive oral health promotion, the control of risk factors and indicators and the provision of professional plaque biofilm removal. It is of paramount importance to underline that SPIC should not limit its scope exclusively to patients already in a state of peri-implant health; in fact, it is imperative that it should extend its protective effect to individuals who have been previously diagnosed and treated for peri-implant diseases, focusing on preventing its recurrence and progression, thereby avoiding further complications, such as implant loss.This narrative review presents an overview of the current literature on the maintenance of peri-implant tissues' health and the steps of SPIC providing insights into the critical factors to be considered when managing dental implant patients in the general dental practice.

Biofilm accumulation on complete arch subperiosteal implant-supported prostheses: Effect of pontic type

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Complete arch subperiosteal implant-supported prostheses present challenges in terms of effective cleaning, leading to the accumulation of biofilm on their intaglio surfaces. The association between different intaglio surface morphologies and biofilm accumulation on complete arch subperiosteal implant-supported prostheses is unclear.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate the correlation between the intaglio surface of complete arch subperiosteal implant-supported prostheses and biofilm accumulation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Sixty-eight complete arch subperiosteal implant-supported prostheses were fabricated with varying interimplant distances and pontic morphologies. Four different types of pontic morphologies were included: saddle, flat, scalloped, and ovate. To simulate biofilm accumulation, a green aerosol was sprayed onto the intaglio surface. Dental floss was used to clean the colored spray from the intaglio surface. The intaglio surfaces of prostheses were then scanned with an intraoral scanner. The biofilm areas were identified and calculated by using a 3-dimensional macroscopical quantification method. The distances between adjacent implants and transmucosal height were measured. The correlation between interimplant distances and biofilm areas, and the correlation between the biofilm areas and transmucosal height, were analyzed using the Spearman test. Furthermore, a generalized estimating equation (GEE) was employed to examine the relationship between pontic morphology and biofilm area, adjusting for location, cantilever, implant distance, and transmucosal height (α=.05).

RESULTS

A significant correlation was found between the biofilm area and transmucosal height (correlation coefficient=0.208, P<.001). A significant increase in biofilm accumulation was observed in the saddle group compared with the 3 groups in GEE Models I and II.

CONCLUSIONS

Flat pontics and ovate pontics have significantly lower biofilm retention. Moreover, transmucosal height plays a significant role in biofilm accumulation in the pontic area.

Clinical outcomes and periodontal conditions of dental implants placed in free fibula flaps (FFF): a retrospective study with a mean follow-up of 6 years

OBJECTIVES

Up-to-date literature regarding long-term success of implant rehabilitations after microvascular reconstructions with free fibula flap (FFF) is still very scarce. This study aimed to evaluate clinical outcomes, especially related to oral hygiene conditions, of patients rehabilitated with this technique.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 25 patients who underwent maxillofacial reconstructive surgery with FFF were retrospectively evaluated for soft tissues conditions, oral hygiene habits, and implant survival and success, assessed with a mean follow-up of 6 (range 2-15) years after loading.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients received full-arch fixed prostheses and 11 removable bar-supported overdentures. At the follow-up evaluation, 52% of prostheses did not allow proper accessibility for oral hygiene. Overall prosthetic survival was 100%, and implant survival and success were respectively 93.6% and 72%. Prevalence of peri-implantitis was 29% at implant level and that at patient level 96%.

CONCLUSIONS

Six-year clinical outcomes of this study reveal that poor oral hygiene practices and compliance by patients who underwent maxillofacial reconstruction with FFF are significantly associated with peri-implant disease.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Findings of the present study underline the need by clinicians for a careful assessment, in reference to a specific implant therapy, of patient's prosthetic accessibility for oral hygiene procedures.

Prevalence of Peri-Implant Disease in Patients with Stage III or IV Periodontitis: Results of a Long-Term Follow-Up from a Specialized Periodontal Practice

The aim of this study was to examine the conditions of implants that had been in function for 5-17 years in stage III/IV periodontitis patients of a specialized periodontal practice. There were 83 patients (43 female/40 male, mean age 64.4 (9.69) years), with a total of 213 implants, who participated in the study. Assessments included periodontal and peri-implant probing depths, bleeding and plaque scores, and a radiographic examination. Smoking habits, participation in a supportive care program (SCP), and the Implant Disease Risk Assessment (IDRA) scores were recorded. A total of 44 patients presented with stage III periodontitis, and 39 with stage IV. In all, 85% of patients had adhered to regular SCP. On an implant/patient level, peri-implant health was found in 37.1.7% (79 implants)/24.1% (20 patients), peri-implant mucositis in 58.7% (125 implants)/66.3% (55 patients), and peri-implantitis in 4.2% (9 implants)/9.6% (8 patients). IDRA scores showed 30.5% of implants at moderate and 69.5% at high risk. The present long-term analysis shows a high prevalence of peri-implant disease in patients treated for advanced periodontitis. These findings underline the challenges involved in the long-term maintenance of oral health in stage III/IV periodontitis patients restored with dental implants.

Peri-implantitis as the consequence of errors in implant therapy

Peri-implantitis is a plaque-associated pathologic condition occurring in tissues around dental implants, characterized by inflammation in the peri-implant mucosa and subsequent progressive loss of supporting bone. It is a highly prevalent disease, as extensively estimated by large-population, cross-sectional studies. As peri-implant diseases represent opportunistic infections, it is reasonable to assume that nonideal conditions, local and/or general, may favor the progression of peri-implant inflammation. Some of these conditions could be a result of poor planning and/or inadequate execution of any step of the entire process treatment. This article describes the major possible factors in implant therapy that may lead to peri-implantitis. For some of these (ie, inappropriate patient selection, insufficient periodontal therapy, lack of diagnosis and management of peri-implant mucositis, erratic supportive peri-implant/periodontal therapy) there is a good level of evidence, whereas for others (ie, wrong implant placement, poor postoperative care, inadequate prosthetic reconstruction, lack of assessment and management of peri-implant soft-tissue deficiencies) there is little scientific evidence. More research is therefore needed to clearly identify the errors and/or complications possibly leading to peri-implantitis, particularly over the long term.

Clinical and Radiological Characterization of the Long-Term Association between Unaffected/Minimally Affected Implants and History of Severe Periodontitis: A Retrospective Study

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this research were to compare, retrospectively, the clinical and radiographic modifications of periodontal parameters and peri-implant conditions and to analyze the relationship between the changes in periodontal parameters and peri-implant conditions over a mean follow-up period of 7.6 years in a treated population with progressive/uncontrolled periodontitis and at least one unaffected/minimally affected implant.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Nineteen partially edentulous patients having 77 implants inserted, with a mean age of 54.84 ± 7.60 years, were matched for age, gender, compliance, smoking status, general health, and implant characteristics. Periodontal parameters were evaluated in the remaining teeth. Means per teeth and implants were used when making comparisons.

RESULTS

Statistically significant differences were observed between baseline and final examination in teeth for tPPD, tCAL and MBL. Furthermore, at 7.6 years, statistically significant differences existed between implants and teeth with regard to iCAL and tCAL (p = 0.03). Multiple regression analyses were performed and revealed a significant association regarding iPPD and CBL with smoking and periodontal diagnosis. In addition, FMBS was significantly associated with CBL. Unaffected/minimally affected implants were found more frequently in the posterior mandible, with longer lengths (>10 mm) and small diameters (<4 mm), including in screwed multi-unit bridges.

CONCLUSIONS

The study results appear to reflect minimally affected mean crestal bone-level loss around implants in comparison to the marginal bone-level loss around teeth when exposed to uncontrolled severe periodontal disease over a mean period of observation of 7.6 years, while the unaffected/minimally affected implants seemed to benefit from a combination of clinical factors, including posterior mandibular position, smaller diameters, and screwed multi-unit restorations.

Primordial and primary prevention of peri-implant diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to assess the efficacy of risk factor control to prevent the occurrence of peri-implant diseases (PIDs) in adult patients awaiting dental implant rehabilitation (primordial prevention) or in patients with dental implants surrounded by healthy peri-implant tissues (primary prevention).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search was performed without any time limit on different databases up to August 2022. Interventional and observational studies with at least 6 months of follow-up were considered. The occurrence of peri-implant mucositis and/or peri-implantitis was the primary outcome. Pooled data analyses were performed using random effect models according to the type of risk factor and outcome.

RESULTS

Overall, 48 studies were selected. None assessed the efficacy of primordial preventive interventions for PIDs. Indirect evidence on the primary prevention of PID indicated that diabetic patients with dental implants and good glycaemic control have a significantly lower risk of peri-implantitis (odds ratio [OR] = 0.16; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.03-0.96; I² : 0%), and lower marginal bone level (MBL) changes (OR = -0.36 mm; 95% CI: -0.65 to -0.07; I² : 95%) compared to diabetic patients with poor glycaemic control. Patients attending supportive periodontal/peri-implant care (SPC) regularly have a lower risk of overall PIDs (OR = 0.42; 95% CI: 0.24-0.75; I² : 57%) and peri-implantitis compared to irregular attendees. The risk of dental implant failure (OR = 3.76; 95% CI: 1.50-9.45; I² : 0%) appears to be greater under irregular or no SPC than regular SPC. Implants sites with augmented peri-implant keratinized mucosa (PIKM) show lower peri-implant inflammation (SMD = -1.18; 95% CI: -1.85 to -0.51; I² : 69%) and lower MBL changes (MD = -0.25; 95% CI: -0.45 to -0.05; I² : 62%) compared to dental implants with PIKM deficiency. Studies on smoking cessation and oral hygiene behaviors were inconclusive.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of available evidence, the present findings indicate that in patients with diabetes, glycaemic control should be promoted to avoid peri-implantitis development. The primary prevention of peri-implantitis should involve regular SPC. PIKM augmentation procedures, where a PIKM deficiency exists, may favour the control of peri-implant inflammation and the stability of MBL. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of smoking cessation and oral hygiene behaviours, as well as the implementation of standardized primordial and primary prevention protocols for PIDs.

Adjunctive locally and systemically delivered antimicrobials during surgical treatment of peri-implantitis: A systematic review

AIM

To answer the following PICOS question: "In patients with peri-implantitis, what is the efficacy of surgical therapy with adjunctive systemic or local antimicrobials, in comparison with surgical therapy alone, in terms of pocket probing depth reduction, as assessed in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with at least 6 months of follow-up?"

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted. Reduction in mean probing pocket depth (PPD) was the primary outcome. Secondary clinical outcomes were changes in suppuration (%), changes in bleeding on probing (BOP) (%), marginal bone level changes (mm), disease resolution (%), and implant/prosthesis loss (%). Patient-reported outcome measures, possible adverse effects, and oral-health-related quality of life were also extracted if such data were available.

RESULTS

Four RCTs assessing the use of locally (two RCTs) and systemically (two RCTs) administered antimicrobial adjuncts to surgical treatment of peri-implantitis, with 6-36-month follow-up, were included. Because of the substantial heterogeneity of interventions between the studies, meta-analysis could not be performed. A reduction in the mean PPD was observed following all the involved surgical treatments, irrespective of the addition of antimicrobials. Except for the effect of systemic antimicrobials on marginal bone level changes and local antimicrobials on BOP, the effect of systemic and local antimicrobials was equivocal for all secondary outcome measures.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the limited available evidence, the adjunctive use of the currently tested systemic or local antimicrobials during surgical therapy, in comparison with surgical therapy alone, in patients with peri-implantitis does not seem to improve the clinical efficacy. With regard the use of systemic antimicrobials, only 50% of the cases showed disease resolution after 1 year. There is a lack of studies that consider the sole use of local antimicrobials. Therefore, their true effect remains unclear.

Limited marginal bone loss in implant-supported fixed full-arch rehabilitations after 5 years of follow-up

PURPOSE

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the 5-year results in terms of marginal bone level (MBL) around implants supporting fixed full-arch metal-ceramic restorations in a series of cases of patients who had lost their teeth in that dental arch because of severe periodontal disease.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was designed to evaluate the 5-year MBL results of OsseoSpeed™ Astra Tech TX implants with internal tapered conical connection. Age, gender, bone substratum, smoking habits, history of periodontitis, and prosthetic features were recorded. Mixed linear model was used to determine the influence of the different variables on MBL.

RESULTS

In this series, a total of 160 implants placed in 19 patients were evaluated. No implant failure was reported during the 5 years of follow-up. Only 14 (8.75%) implants had more than 2 mm of MBL. Abutment height, F(3,142) = 6.917, p < .001, and implant diameter, F(1,141) = 15.059, p < .001, were determined to be statistically associated with MBL. No other effect was significant. Pairwise comparisons showed that MBL was larger for abutment height = 1 (MBL = -0.987, SE = 0.186) compared with the remaining heights [-0.335 (0.171), -0.169 (0.192) and -0.247 (0.267), 2, 4 and 6 mm, respectively]. MBL was larger for narrow (-0.510, SE = 0.169) than for wide implants (-0.364, SE = 0.190).

CONCLUSION

The current study demonstrates that the vast majority of internal conical connection implants supporting fixed full-arch metal-ceramic restorations do not suffer from relevant MBL after 5 years in function. Particularly, those implants with transmucosal abutments longer than 2 mm show less than 0.5 mm from the implant shoulder to the marginal bone.

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.

Tooth preservation vs. extraction and implant placement in periodontally compromised patients: A systematic review and analysis of studies

PURPOSE

The aim of this systematic review was to identify studies with a minimum of 5-years follow-up, reporting on the management of periodontally compromised teeth with either extraction and subsequent implant placement or teeth preservation with conventional periodontal treatment and application of regenerative procedures. The outcomes of these two approaches, based on clinical and radiographic data and the incidence of tooth- and implant-loss, were also investigated.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic search for studies reporting on clinical and radiographic outcomes of periodontal treatment or replacement of periodontally compromised teeth with implants was conducted in 3 electronic databases, followed by a hand-search in 8 journals. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, and case series with prospective design were included.

RESULTS

The initial search resulted in 1080 papers. After the first two screenings, 24 publications were selected for inclusion in this systematic review. The treatment protocols for the teeth preservation group contained nonsurgical and/or surgical periodontal treatment with or without regeneration procedures. The implant studies included extraction of periodontally involved teeth and implant placement with or without bone and soft tissue augmentation, followed by restoration with fixed dental prostheses (FDPs). Survival rates ranged between 81.8% and 100% in the tooth retention group, and between 94.8% and 100% in the implant group. In the extraction group, no complications were reported for 76.09% of the implants. Similarly, no complications were reported for 86.83% of the tooth retention group. The lack of standardized comparable studies prohibited conduction of a metaanalysis.

CONCLUSION

Both treatment approaches, treatment of periodontally compromised teeth, or tooth extraction followed by implant placement, present high survival rates. The application of bone regeneration techniques improves the long-term prognosis of periodontally involved teeth. Hence, treatment of periodontally involved teeth with subsequent application of a rigorous maintenance protocol can be a viable alternative for a number of years, before proceeding to extraction and replacement with dental implants. More well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed in order to draw definite conclusions on the subject.

A Retrospective Analysis of Biological Complications of Dental Implants

Methods

A retrospective analysis of patients aged ≥18 years and having dental implants placed at Dubai Health Authority in 2010. Relevant information related to systemic-, patient-, implant-, site-, surgical- and prosthesis-related factors were collected. The strength of association between the prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis and each variable was measured by chi-square analysis. A binary logistic regression analysis was performed to identify possible risk factors.

Results

A total of 162 patients with 301 implant-supported restorations were included in the study. The age of the patients ranged between 19 and 72 with a mean age of 46.4 ± 11.7 years. The prevalence of peri-implant mucositis at the patient and implant levels were 44.4% and 38.2%, respectively. For peri-implantitis, the prevalence at the patient level was 5.6%, while the prevalence at the implant level was 4.0%. The binary logistic regression identified three risk factors (smoking habits, histories of treated periodontitis and lack of peri-implant maintenance) for peri-implantitis.

Conclusion

Within the limitations of this study, smoking habits, history of treated periodontitis and lack of peri-implant maintenance were significant risk factors for peri-implantitis. Early detection of these factors would ensure appropriate planning and care of patients at high risk of developing peri-implant diseases.

Incidence of Peri-Implantitis and Relationship with Different Conditions: A Retrospective Study

Articles on the prevalence of peri-implant diseases showed that 90% of peri-implant tissues had some form of inflammatory response and a prevalence of peri-implantitis from 28% to 51% according to various publications. Objective: To provide an overview of how risk factors can be related with peri-implantitis. Methods: A retrospective longitudinal study including 555 implants placed in 132 patients was evaluated based on the presence of peri-implantitis following the criteria of Renvert et al. 2018. Results: In total, 21 patients (15.9%) suffered peri-implantitis (PPG) and 111 patients (84.1%) did not suffer peri-implantitis (NPG). The results reveal that smokers have a high incidence of peri-implantitis (72.7%) compared to non-smokers (27.3%) (p < 0.0005). Another variable with significant results (p < 0.01) was periodontitis: 50% PPG and 23.9% NPG suffered advanced periodontitis. Systemic diseases such as arterial hypertension, diabetes mellitus, osteoporosis, and cardiovascular diseases do not show a statistically significant influence on the incidence of peri-implantitis. Patients who did not attend their maintenance therapy appointment had an incidence of peri-implantitis of 61.4%, compared to 27.3% in those who attend (p < 0.0001). From the results obtained, we can conclude that relevant factors affect peri-implantitis, such as tobacco habits, moderate and severe periodontitis, and attendance in maintenance therapy.

Domiciliary Use of Chlorhexidine vs. Postbiotic Gels in Patients with Peri-Implant Mucositis: A Split-Mouth Randomized Clinical Trial

Peri-implant mucositis is a pathological condition characterized by an inflammatory process in the peri-implant soft tissues. Progression to peri-implantitis takes place in case of peri-implant bone resorption. Recently, an aid for non-surgical treatment by mechanical debridement (SRP) has been identified in probiotics. As there are no recent studies regarding their use for peri-implant mucositis, the aim of this study was to test a new postbiotic gel for this clinical condition. A split-mouth randomized clinical trial was performed. Twenty patients undergoing SRP were randomly assigned to two treatments based on the following oral gels: chlorhexidine-based Curasept Periodontal Gel (Group 1) and postbiotic-based Biorepair Parodontgel Intensive (Group 2). At baseline (T0) and after three (T1) and six (T2) months, the following peri-implant mucositis indexes were recorded: Probing Pocket Depth (PPD), Plaque Index (PI), Gingival Bleeding Index (GBI), Bleeding Score (BS), Marginal Mucosal Condition (MMC). A significant decrease is reported for both postbiotic and chlorhexidine for all peri-implant mucositis indices studied. Quite the opposite, no significant variation was present in intergroup comparisons. Greater improvements for BS, GBI and MMC inflammatory indices of the postbiotic gel compared to chlorhexidine suggest the importance of further studies to investigate the relevance of the product alone.

One-year outcomes of dental implants with a hybrid surface macro-design placed in patients with history of periodontitis: A randomized clinical trial

AIM

To evaluate the radiological, clinical, and microbiological outcomes of implants with a hybrid surface macro-design in patients with a history of periodontitis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study was designed as a 12-month, parallel-arm, randomized controlled trial where patients with a history of treated periodontitis in need of dental implants for single-unit or short-span prosthesis were randomly allocated to a test [implants with a machined titanium surface in the coronal collar (hybrid; HS)] or a control group [conventional implants with moderately rough surface up to the implant shoulder (RS)]. Patients were followed at 3, 6, and 12 months after loading with assessment of radiological, clinical, and microbiological outcomes, as well as patient-related outcome measures (PROMs).

RESULTS

Forty patients were randomly assigned to either the RS group (n = 20) or the HS (n = 20) group. At 1 year, the mean marginal bone level changes were 0.22 [standard deviation (SD) 0.36] mm for the HS group and 0.22 (SD 0.29) mm for the RS group, with no significant differences between them (p = .961). Similarly, no significant differences in clinical, microbiological, or PROMs were observed between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

HS implants demonstrated radiographic, clinical, and microbiological characteristics equal to RS implants in patients with a history of periodontitis.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier NCT05010382).

Effectiveness of implant-supported fixed partial denture in patients with history of periodontitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

This systematic review investigates the effectiveness of implant-supported fixed partial denture (IS-FPD) in patients with history of periodontitis (HP) vs. patients with no history of periodontitis (NHP).

METHODS

A literature search was performed on different databases on May 2020. Prospective and retrospective studies assessing survival (primary outcome), success and biological/mechanical complications of IS-FPDs in HP vs. NHP patients at ≥1 year after implant loading were evaluated. Meta-analyses were conducted by estimating hazard ratio (HR), risk ratio (RR) and standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random effect models.

RESULTS

Of the initially identified 4096 articles, 349 underwent a full-text evaluation. Finally, 17 were included. Pooled data analyses showed that overall implant survival was significantly higher in the NHP than the HP group (HR = 2.06; 95% CI = 1.37-3.09; I²  = 0%). This difference was noted when follow-up ≥5 years. The risk of peri-implantitis was higher in HP than NHP patients (RR = 3.3; 95% CI = 1.31-8.3; I²  = 0%), whereas the mean marginal bone level change over time was not different between the groups (SMD = -0.16 mm; 95% CI = -1.04-0.73; I²  = 98%).

CONCLUSIONS

In partially edentulous patients receiving IS-FPDs, a history of periodontitis is associated with poorer survival rate and higher risk of peri-implantitis during a 5-10 years period after implant loading.

Efficacy of rehabilitation of stage IV periodontitis patients with full-arch fixed prostheses: Tooth-supported versus Implant-supported-A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of implant-supported in comparison to tooth-supported full-arch prostheses in patients with stage IV periodontitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Systematic electronic search (CENTRAL/MEDLINE/SCOPUS) up to March 2020 was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials and cohort-like studies comparing/evaluating fixed full-arch rehabilitation on teeth or implants in patients with stage IV periodontitis. The primary outcome measure was loss of teeth/implants and restorations. Data extraction was performed to create evidence tables, and meta-analyses were carried out as appropriate.

RESULTS

A total of 26 studies (31 publications) were identified but none addressed the scientific question in a controlled and randomized design. The risk of bias throughout the included studies was judged to be high, and meta-analyses demonstrated a high degree of heterogeneity. Mean-weighted observation periods in studies on tooth-supported restorations were significantly longer than in studies on implant-supported restorations. The predicted loss of teeth and tooth-supported full-arch restorations over 10 years was 1% and 5%, respectively. The 15-year estimates were 10% and 13%. Corresponding predictions for implants and implant-supported restorations for 10 years amounted to 4% and 6%, respectively. Technical complications were the most commonly reported and affected 8% of tooth-supported restorations (during 7.2 years) and 42% of implant-supported structures (during 2.6 years). Peri-implantitis- or peri-implantitis-like symptoms were observed at an estimated 9% of implants (after 3.1 years).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on observational studies on full-arch rehabilitation of stage IV periodontitis patients, 10-year estimates of tooth loss were lower than the corresponding estimates for implants. Estimated loss of tooth- and implant-supported restorations at 10 years was similar. Technical complications were more prevalent at implant-supported when compared to tooth-supported restorations.

Evaluation of the implant disease risk assessment (IDRA) tool: A retrospective study in patients with treated periodontitis and implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs)

Aim

To evaluate the Implant Disease Risk Assessment (IDRA) tool for the prediction of peri‐implantitis in treated periodontitis patients with implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) after at least 5 years of function.

Material and methods

From the patient pool of implant patients enrolled in a regular supportive periodontal therapy programme (SPT) for at least 5 years, 239 patients were screened. Eighty patients met the inclusion criteria and underwent evaluation through the criteria of the IDRA tool. Areas under the curve (AUCs) for receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves including 95% confidence intervals were estimated.

Results

Seventy‐nine patients (43 males and 36 females, 8 smokers), aged on average 59.0 years (range: 40–79 years) at baseline (i.e. FDP delivery) were analysed. The calculated IDRA‐risk was in 34 patients (42.5%) a moderate risk, while 45 patients (56.3%) were considered at high IDRA‐risk. One patient categorized at low IDRA‐risk was excluded from the analysis.

The AUC was 0.613 (95% CI: 0.464–0.762) if the IDRA‐risk was associated with prevalence of peri‐implantitis at the most recent follow‐up. Peri‐implantitis was diagnosed in 4 patients (12%) at moderate and in 12 patients (27%) at high IDRA‐risk, respectively. The calculated odds ratio for developing peri‐implantitis in patients with high IDRA‐risk compared with patients with moderate IDRA‐risk was 2.727 with no statistically significant difference between the two groups (95% CI: 0.793–9.376).

Conclusion

Within the limitations of the present retrospective study, the IDRA algorithm might represent a promising tool to assess patients at moderate or high risk of developing peri‐implantitis.

Reduced fracture load of dental implants after implantoplasty with different instrumentation sequences. An in vitro study

OBJECTIVES

To assess the mechanical stability of implants after implantoplasty and thermocyclic loading, the residual thickness of the instrumented areas and neighbouring tooth injury due to implantoplasty.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using a phantom head simulator and maxillary model implants were subjected to an implantoplasty procedure. Thirty implants were randomly assigned to receive one of three instrumentation sequences. After instrumentation, injury on neighbouring teeth was assessed. Instrumented implants and non-instrumented controls were subjected to 1.2 million cycles of thermo-mechanical loading in a chewing machine. Afterwards, maximum fracture load for all implants and an additional five pristine control implants was tested.

RESULTS

Generally, damage of neighbour teeth was a frequent finding (33 ± 56% of all cases) with considerable inter-group differences. No considerable inter-group difference for the residual implant thickness was found for different areas assessed. No implant fractured during cyclic loading. Fracture load was reduced after cyclic loading of uninstrumented implants from 2,724 ± 70 N to 2,299 ± 127 N, and after implantoplasty to 1,737 ± 165 N, while no effect by the instrumentation sequence could be observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Both implantoplasty and cyclic loading were shown to reduce the implants' maximum bending strength. Cyclic loading in a laboratory masticator, simulating a five-year equivalent of chewing, did not result in fractured implants. Since neighbouring tooth injury was assessed often, care should be taken with the selection of suitable instruments.

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

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to determine if a previous history of periodontitis according to the preset definitions of the 2017 World Workshop is correlated with increased implant failure, and occurrence and severity of peri-implantitis (PI).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients with a history of periodontitis who received nonsurgical and, if indicated, surgical corrective therapy prior to implant placement was performed. Periodontitis stage and grade were determined for each included patient based on data from the time of initiation of active periodontal therapy. Cox Proportional Hazard Frailty models were built to analyze the correlation between stage and grade of periodontitis at baseline with implant failure, as well as occurrence and severity of PI.

RESULTS

Ninety-nine patients with a history of periodontitis receiving 221 implants were followed for a mean duration of 10.6 ± 4.5 years after implant placement. Six implants (2.7%) failed and a higher rate of implant failure due to PI was found for grade C patients (P < 0.05), whereas only an increased trend was seen for stages III and IV compared with I and II. Grading significantly influenced the risk of marginal bone loss (MBL) >25% of the implant length (P = 0.022) in PI-affected implants. However, a direct correlation between higher-level stage and grade and PI prevalence was not recorded.

CONCLUSION

No statistically significant association between periodontitis stage or grade and the prevalence of PI was found. However, when PI was diagnosed, there was a relationship between periodontitis grade and severity of PI or the occurrence of implant failure.

Clinical and radiographic evaluation of implant-supported single-unit crowns with cantilever extension in posterior areas: A retrospective study with a follow-up of at least 10 years

BACKGROUND

Implant-supported restorations with cantilever extension may display high rates of biological and technical complications.

PURPOSE

To report the outcomes of single-unit crowns with cantilever extension (SCCs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with SCCs were reevaluated after ≥10 years of loading. Radiographic marginal bone levels (mBLs) at baseline (ie, delivery of SCCs) and follow-up were calculated and compared between implant surfaces adjacent to and distant from the cantilever extension. Implant survival and success rates were calculated.

RESULTS

Twenty-one patients with 25 SCs supported by 25 implants were reevaluated after a mean of 13.6 ± 3.8 years (range: 10-19 years). No implants were lost. The mean overall mBLs changed from 0.99 mm ± 0.95 at baseline to 0.95 mm ± 0.99 at follow-up (p = 0.853). The mean pocket probing depths changed from 3.39 mm ± 0.62 at baseline to 3.34 mm ± 0.54 at follow-up (p = 0.635). Loss of retention occurred 3× in 2 patients (14.3%). At follow-up, peri-implant health was diagnosed in 10 (48%) and peri-implant mucositis in 11 (52%) patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of the present study, the use of implant-supported SCs with cantilever extension in posterior areas represents a reliable long-term treatment option with a 100% implant survival rate and minimal marginal bone level changes.

Natural teeth and implant-retained prosthesis in treated periodontitis subjects

History of periodontal disease is a risk factor for the development of peri-implantitis. Implant treatment in susceptible patients should be followed by adequate periodontal treatment and stringent supportive programs. The assessment of the patient needs to be carefully evaluated before the procedure for implants. The risk associated with the sites to be treated requires evaluation with regular visits. The completion of treatment will still require committed follow-up visits with checks for pockets, bone loss, and plaque scores around implant-retained prosthesis as well as complete dentition. In our report, we describe in detail the reconstruction of lost dentition with implants in treated periodontitis subjects. The patients are still being followed with regular recall programs.

The occurrence of peri-implant mucositis associated with the shift of submucosal microbiome in patients with a history of periodontitis during the first two years

AIM

To investigate the dynamic changes of peri-implant microbiome in patients with a history of periodontitis and to construct a microbial prediction model.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The prospective study was performed at one month (T1), one year (T2) and two years (T3) after restoration. Clinical examinations [probing depth (PD), bleeding on probing (BOP), suppuration (SUP)], radiographic examinations and sample collection were conducted at three timepoints. Peri-implant sulcular fluid (PISF) was collected and analysed by 16S rRNA gene sequencing. Generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) was used to identify differences.

RESULTS

Totally, 168 subjects were assessed for eligibility. Twenty-two patients were recruited in the longitudinal study. Eventually, 67 PISF samples from 24 implants of 12 patients were collected and analysed. Peri-implant microbiome showed increasing diversity and complexity over time. Disease-associated genera Porphyromonas, Tannerella, Treponema and Prevotella dramatically increased from T1 to T3. The prediction model for clinical suppuration at T1 showed a high accuracy of 90%.

CONCLUSION

The dysbiosis of peri-implant microbiome increased with time during the two-year observation in patients with a history of periodontitis. Genera of Porphyromonas, Tannerella, Treponema and Prevotella were biomarkers of peri-implant mucositis. Microbiota at the early stage could predict subsequent microbial dysbiosis and clinical suppuration.

Assessment of Peri-Implant Soft Tissues Conditions around Short and Ultra-Short Implant-Supported Single Crowns: A 3-Year Retrospective Study on Periodontally Healthy Patients and Patients with a History of Periodontal Disease

The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate implant survival, marginal bone loss and peri-implant complications in 326 short and ultra-short implants. Implants were placed in the maxillary and mandibular posterior regions of 140 patients with (PP) and without (NPP) a history of periodontal disease. Clinical and radiographic examinations were performed at 3-year recall appointments. The 8.0, 6.0 and 5.0 mm-length implants placed in PP and NPP were respectively 43.75% and 38.46%, 35.10% and 34.19%, 21.15% and 27.35%; 325 implants (one early failure) were rehabilitated with single crowns in 139 patients. Overall implant survival after 3 years of follow-up was 97.55%, 98.08% and 96.61% for PP and NPP (p = 0.46). Crestal bone level variations were not statistically different among PP and NPP; 15.41% of implants presented signs of mucositis, 14.71% and 16.67% in PP and NPP (p = 0.64). Setting the threshold for bone loss at 2 mm after 36 months, peri-implantitis prevalence was 2.2%, 1.96% and 2.63% in PP and NPP (p = 0.7). Overall implant success was 82.39%, 83.33% and 80.7% for PP and NPP (p = 0.55). Short-term outcomes suggest that short and ultra-short locking-taper implants can successfully be restored with single crowns in the posterior jaws both in PP and NPP.

Management of Peri-Implant Diseases: A Survey of Australian Periodontists

BACKGROUND/AIM

This survey-based study aims to explore the clinical management protocols of followed by Australian periodontists in relation to peri-implant diseases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A five-part online questionnaire was developed and administered through email. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis, with the univariate associations between a categorical outcome and the variables evaluated using Pearson's Chi-squared test.

RESULTS

The survey yielded 99 responses, resulting in a response rate of 41.8%. Most participants were male and aged 35-44 years. More than a quarter of practitioners had been placing implants for 6-10 years and almost two-fifths of practitioners placed 1-10 implants per month. The estimated prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis in the general Australian population was 47% and 21%, respectively. Practitioners reported using systemic antibiotics to manage peri-implant mucositis (7%) and (72%) peri-implantitis lesions, with a combination of amoxicillin and metronidazole. Most common treatment modalities were oral hygiene instructions, nonsurgical debridement and antimicrobial gel/rinse. Surgical debridement and systemic antibiotics were also often used for peri-implantitis treatment. Practitioners preferred a 3-month clinical follow-up and 6-month radiographic evaluation. Furthermore, three-quarters of practitioners rated their management as moderately effective, although upwards of nine-tenths expressed the need for further training and awareness.

CONCLUSION

This study confirms a significant use of empirical treatment modalities due to lack of standard therapeutic protocol. However, some approaches followed by the specialists may provide a basis to formulate a therapeutic protocol for peri-implant disease management.

A retrospective cohort study on peri-implant complications in implants up to 10 years of functional loading in periodontally compromised patients

BACKGROUND

Prevalence of peri-implantitis is directly proportional to the time of functional loading. The aim of this retrospective study was to assess the survival and success rates as well as the incidence of peri-implantitis among patients with a history of periodontitis and among implants with 1 to 10 years of functional loading.

METHODS

We evaluated clinical records of periodontally compromised patients treated between January 1998 and July 2002, with implants enrolled in a supportive periodontal and peri-implant treatment follow-up program. The following assessment indexes during follow-up were recorded: suppuration on probing, modified bleeding on probing, probing depth, implant mobility, bone changes, and criteria of success of Albrektsson.

RESULTS

Clinical data of 475 patients with 1,991 implants were analyzed for a period of 10 years of functional loading. The survival and success rates were 91.8% and 75.4%, respectively, and the cumulative incidence of peri-implantitis among patients was 24.4%. The survival rate was 96.1%, and the success rate was 83.7% among implants. The incidence of peri-implantitis exhibited a peak rate after the seventh year (2.1%). The prevalence of peri-implantitis increased from 3.2% to 9.7% between 5 and 10 years of follow-up, and the peri-implantitis rate among implants was 12.9% after 10 years of functional loading.

CONCLUSION

Peri-implantitis begins to appear more frequently after the fifth year of functional loading, especially between the seventh and eighth years of function.

Dental Implants for Patients with Periodontitis

This article provides a narrative review of the use of dental implants in patients with periodontitis. using clinical examples where possible, consideration is given to the survival and success of implants, peri-implantitis, comparison of periodontally compromised teeth to implants and to treatment planning to help achieve favourable outcomes.<br/> The challenges associated with restoring an edentulous arch or partially dentate dentition with implants where significant alveolar atrophy has occurred can be considerable. Compromised outcomes may be commonplace.<br/> Dental implant treatment is more likely to be successful for those patients who attain and maintain excellent plaque control. Professional support should focus on managing underlying periodontitis prior to commencing implant therapy and providing long term, regular supportive periodontal care upon completion of treatment.

Peri-implantitis

OBJECTIVES

This narrative review provides an evidence-based overview on peri-implantitis for the 2017 World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases and Conditions.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted addressing the following topics: 1) definition of peri-implantitis; 2) conversion from peri-implant mucositis to peri-implantitis, 3) onset and pattern of disease progression, 4) characteristics of peri-implantitis, 5) risk factors/indicators for peri-implantitis, and 6) progressive crestal bone loss in the absence of soft tissue inflammation.

CONCLUSIONS

1)Peri-implantitis is a pathological condition occurring in tissues around dental implants, characterized by inflammation in the peri-implant connective tissue and progressive loss of supporting bone. 2)The histopathologic and clinical conditions leading to the conversion from peri-implant mucositis to peri-implantitis are not completely understood. 3)The onset of peri-implantitis may occur early during follow-up and the disease progresses in a non-linear and accelerating pattern. 4a)Peri-implantitis sites exhibit clinical signs of inflammation and increased probing depths compared to baseline measurements. 4b)At the histologic level, compared to periodontitis sites, peri-implantitis sites often have larger inflammatory lesions. 4c)Surgical entry at peri-implantitis sites often reveals a circumferential pattern of bone loss. 5a)There is strong evidence that there is an increased risk of developing peri-implantitis in patients who have a history of chronic periodontitis, poor plaque control skills, and no regular maintenance care after implant therapy. Data identifying "smoking" and "diabetes" as potential risk factors/indicators for peri-implantitis are inconclusive. 5b)There is some limited evidence linking peri-implantitis to other factors such as: post-restorative presence of submucosal cement, lack of peri-implant keratinized mucosa and positioning of implants that make it difficult to perform oral hygiene and maintenance. 6)Evidence suggests that progressive crestal bone loss around implants in the absence of clinical signs of soft tissue inflammation is a rare event.

Patient compliance as a risk factor for the outcome of implant treatment

Peri-implantitis can be explained using a multicausality model. Many factors are involved in the etiology of peri-implantitis, but patient compliance also plays a key role. Oral hygiene, attending recall visits, smoking behavior, and therapy comprehension are relevant factors that contribute to peri-implant health. The clinician should create the most optimal conditions for patients to facilitate adequate oral self-care and to help patients improve their oral hygiene skills. Implementation of a supportive periodontal therapy program is mandatory to control inflammation and plaque accumulation, as well as to keep the incidence of peri-implant diseases low. Patient compliance, including plaque control and dental follow-up, must be optimal. Consequently, precautions must be taken with patients treated with dental implants.

Peri-implantitis

OBJECTIVES

This narrative review provides an evidence-based overview on peri-implantitis for the 2017 World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases and Conditions.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted addressing the following topics: 1) definition of peri-implantitis; 2) conversion from peri-implant mucositis to peri-implantitis, 3) onset and pattern of disease progression, 4) characteristics of peri-implantitis, 5) risk factors/indicators for peri-implantitis, and 6) progressive crestal bone loss in the absence of soft tissue inflammation.

CONCLUSIONS

1)Peri-implantitis is a pathological condition occurring in tissues around dental implants, characterized by inflammation in the peri-implant connective tissue and progressive loss of supporting bone. 2)The histopathologic and clinical conditions leading to the conversion from peri-implant mucositis to peri-implantitis are not completely understood. 3)The onset of peri-implantitis may occur early during follow-up and the disease progresses in a non-linear and accelerating pattern. 4a)Peri-implantitis sites exhibit clinical signs of inflammation and increased probing depths compared to baseline measurements. 4b)At the histologic level, compared to periodontitis sites, peri-implantitis sites often have larger inflammatory lesions. 4c)Surgical entry at peri-implantitis sites often reveals a circumferential pattern of bone loss. 5a)There is strong evidence that there is an increased risk of developing peri-implantitis in patients who have a history of chronic periodontitis, poor plaque control skills, and no regular maintenance care after implant therapy. Data identifying "smoking" and "diabetes" as potential risk factors/indicators for peri-implantitis are inconclusive. 5b)There is some limited evidence linking peri-implantitis to other factors such as: post-restorative presence of submucosal cement, lack of peri-implant keratinized mucosa and positioning of implants that make it difficult to perform oral hygiene and maintenance. 6)Evidence suggests that progressive crestal bone loss around implants in the absence of clinical signs of soft tissue inflammation is a rare event.

Evaluation of peri-implant marginal tissues around tissue-level and bone-level implants in patients with a history of chronic periodontitis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate clinical and radiographic characteristics in peri-implant marginal tissues in patients with a history of chronic periodontitis, rehabilitated using tissue-level or bone-level implants.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Using a split-mouth design, 20 patients with a history of chronic periodontitis were selected and received two different implants, tissue-level group (n = 20) and the bone-level group (n = 20). Peri-implant probing depth, relative peri-implant mucosal margin position, relative peri-implant clinical attachment level, peri-implant plaque index and peri-implant bleeding on probing were evaluated at prosthesis installation, 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after implant loading. Radiographic marginal bone level was evaluated at implant insertion, prosthesis installation, 6 and 24 months after implant loading.

RESULTS

The mean difference of peri-implant marginal bone resorption from implant installation to 24 months in function was 0.75 ± 1.12 mm for the tissue-level group and 0.70 ± 0.72 mm for the bone-level group. No statistically significant difference was found between groups at all assessment periods for clinical and radiographic peri-implant evaluation.

CONCLUSION

Under a rigid supportive therapy, both approaches performed likewise regarding clinical and radiographic parameters for rehabilitation of patients with a history of chronic periodontitis.

The effect of supportive care in preventing peri-implant diseases and implant loss: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the influence of supportive treatment (SPT) during a maintenance period after implant placement on implant survival rate (SR) and incidence of peri-implant diseases.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systemic literature search for studies published up to June 2018 was conducted by two independent reviewers using Pubmed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central databases. Clinical controlled trials (CCT) involved in SPT protocol with more than 1-year follow-up were included. Quantitative meta-analyses were carried out to analyze the risk ratio (RR) of SR, the incidence of peri-implantitis, and peri-implant mucositis between SPT and non-SPT groups. Any potential confounding factors were investigated using meta-regression.

RESULTS

Nine CCTs fulfilled the criteria. To evaluate the influence of SPT on SR, peri-implantitis, and peri-implant mucositis, six of nine, three of nine, and three of nine articles were included in further meta-analysis, respectively. SPT group significantly showed higher SR (RR: 1.10; p < 0.001), lower prevalence of peri-implantitis (RR: 0.25; p < 0.001) and peri-implant mucositis (RR: 0.57; p < 0.001) than the non-SPT group. Meta-regression of the selected studies failed to find an association between SR, peri-implantitis, and peri-implant mucositis and confounding factors: application of chemical agents and the frequency of SPT.

CONCLUSION

SPT can potentially improve peri-implant health in terms of SR, peri-implantitis, and peri-implant mucositis. Additionally, the correlation in recall interval and adjunctive use of chemical agents during SPT to peri-implant diseases and implant loss could not be found.

Effect of Different Laser Wavelengths on Periodontopathogens in Peri-Implantitis: A Review of In Vivo Studies

Nowadays, many studies are examining the effectiveness of dental lasers in the treatment of peri-implantitis; however, most of them only report periodontal parameter changes. The authors of this review tried to address the question: “What is the effect of different laser wavelengths on oral bacteria that cause peri-implantitis?” An electronic search of PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was performed. The following search terms were used: (peri-implantitis OR periimplantitis) OR/AND (microbial OR microbiologic) AND (laser OR Er:YAG OR erbium OR diode OR Nd:YAG OR neodymium-doped OR Er,Cr:YSGG OR chromium-doped). Initially, 212 studies were identified. After screening the titles and abstracts and excluding studies according to predefined inclusion criteria, seven publications were included in the review. Three studies about the effect of aPDT (antimicrobial photodynamic therapy) reported a decrease in the different bacterial strains associated with peri-implantitis, e.g., A. actinomycetemcomitans, P. gingivalis, P. intermedia, T. denticola, T. forsythia, F. nucleatum, and C. rectus. Two studies showed that the high-power diode laser may have some effect on peri-implant pathogens. Two articles about the Er:YAG laser reported a lowering in the count of oral pathogens; however, it was hard to determine if this was due to the use of the laser. aPDT has the ability to decrease the count of peri-implant pathogens, whereas Er:YAG laser application shows no significant effect on oral bacteria in the long term.

Are There Contraindications for Placing Dental Implants?

There are few absolute contraindications to dental implant placement. Relative contraindications include cognitive decline, American Society of Anesthesiology patient status IV or higher categories, or medical conditions that may jeopardize the life or lifespan of the patient. Precautions for placing dental implants should be viewed with respect to the evidence-based exposures that can contribute to risk of failure, including but not limited to local, behavioral, and medical factors. Risk for dental implant failure increases in association with (1) past history of periodontal disease, (2) bruxism, (3) smoking, and (4) radiation therapy.

How do peri-implant biologic parameters correspond with implant survival and peri-implantitis? A critical review

Objectives

The aim of this critical review was to evaluate whether commonly used biologic diagnostic parameters correspond to implant survival and peri‐implantitis prevalence.

Materials and methods

Publications from 2011 to 2017 were selected by an electronic search using the Pubmed database of the US National Library of Medicine. Prospective and retrospective studies with a mean follow‐up time of at least 5 years and reporting prevalence of peri‐implantitis as well as mean bone loss and standard deviation were selected. The correlation between reported prevalence of peri‐implantitis and reported implant survival, mean follow‐up time, mean bone loss, mean probing depth, and mean bleeding on probing was calculated. Mean bone loss and standard deviation were used for estimation of proportion of implants with bone loss exceeding 1, 2, and 3 mm.

Results

Full‐text analysis was performed for 255 papers from 4,173 available ones, and 41 met all the inclusion criteria. The overall mean weighted survival rate was 96.9% (89.9%–100%) and the reported prevalence of peri‐implantitis ranged between 0% and 39.7%, based on 15 different case definitions. The overall weighted bone loss was 1.1 mm based on 8,182 implants and an average mean loading time ranging from 5 to 20 years. No correlation was found between mean bone loss and the reported prevalence of peri‐implantitis. The estimated prevalence of implants with bone loss above 2 mm was 23%. The overall weighted mean probing depth was 3.3 mm, and mean weighted bleeding was 52.2%. Only a weak correlation was found between survival and function time (r = −0.49). There was no relation between the probing depth or bleeding and the mean bone loss, mean follow‐up time, and reported prevalence of peri‐implantitis.

Conclusion

Biologic parameters mean probing depth and mean bleeding on probing do not correlate with mean bone loss and this irrespective of follow‐up. Case definition for peri‐implantitis varied significantly between studies indicating that an unambiguous definition based on a specified threshold for bone loss is not agreed upon in the literature.

[A review of peri-implant microbiology]

Dental implants represent the majority of treatment strategies used to replace missing teeth. However, peri-implant diseases caused by disturbance in peri-implant microbiological balance are among the reasons for implant failure. Since the 1980s, peri-implant microorganisms have been a hot research topic in dental microbiology. The bacterial ecology between the disease and health largely differs, which directly or indirectly increases the risk of peri-implant diseases. Accordingly, the determination of the 'core microbiome' of peri-implantitis and peri-implant mucositis is a key point of recent research.

In Vitro Comparison of the Efficacy of Peri-Implantitis Treatments on the Removal and Recolonization of Streptococcus gordonii Biofilm on Titanium Disks

Objective: To compare the efficacy of four commonly used clinical procedures in removing Streptococcus gordonii biofilms from titanium disks, and the recolonization of the treated surfaces. Background: Successful peri-implantitis treatment depends on the removal of the dental biofilm. Biofilm that forms after implant debridement may threaten the success of the treatment and the long-term stability of the implants. Methods:S. gordonii biofilms were grown on titanium disks for 48 h and removed using a plastic curette, air-abrasive device (Perio-Flow®), titanium brush (TiBrush®), or implantoplasty. The remaining biofilm and the recolonization of the treated disks were observed using scanning electron microscopy and quantified after staining with crystal violet. Surface roughness (Ra and Rz) was measured using a profilometer. Results:S. gordonii biofilm biomass was reduced after treatment with Perio-Flow®, TiBrush®, and implantoplasty (all p < 0.05), but not plastic curette (p > 0.05), compared to the control group. Recolonization of S. gordonii after treatment was lowest after Perio-Flow®, TiBrush®, and implantoplasty (all p < 0.05 vs. control), but there was no difference between the plastic curette and the control group (p > 0.05). Ra and Rz values ranged from 1–6 µm to 1–2 µm and did not differ statistically between the control, plastic curette, Perio-Flow, and TiBrush groups. However, the implantoplasty group showed a Ra value below 1 µm (p < 0.01, ANOVA, Tukey). Conclusions: Perio-Flow^®, TiBrush^®, and implantoplasty were more effective than the plastic curette at removing the S. gordonii biofilm and preventing recolonization. These results should influence the surgical management of peri-implantitis.