Surgical therapy of single peri-implantitis intrabony defects, by means of deproteinized bovine bone mineral with 10% collagen

Effectiveness of 2D magnesium phosphate hydrogel for surgical decontamination of dental implants: A case series

Dental implants, recognized for their enhanced functionality and aesthetic outcomes, are susceptible to peri-implant mucositis and subsequent peri-implantitis when oral hygiene is inadequate. Effective biofilm management is critical to prevent and manage these prevalent conditions and promote implant longevity. Materials with a two-dimensional (2D) structure have demonstrated robust antimicrobial properties. Among these, 2D magnesium phosphates have garnered significant attention due to their additional biocompatibility and osteoconductive properties. This case series explores the application of a thixotropic inorganic hydrogel, composed of 2D magnesium phosphate, in the surgical treatment of dental implant infections. The hydrogel was used for surgical dental implant decontamination in patients diagnosed with peri-implantitis characterized by inflammation in the peri-implant mucosa and subsequent progressive loss of supporting bone. The study encompassed eight cases with a history of peri-implantitis. Clinical measurements were recorded before and after treatment, including bleeding on probing, suppuration, and probing depth. Radiographic evaluations were conducted to assess the exposure of implant threads. The findings revealed a statistically significant decrease in probing depth, bleeding on probing, and the number of exposed implant threads following treatment with the magnesium phosphate hydrogel, though the exact role of the hydrogel in these improvements warrants further exploration.

The efficacy of reconstructive therapy in the surgical management of peri-implantitis: A 3-year follow-up of a randomized clinical trial

AIM

To assess whether guided bone regeneration (GBR) treatment of peri-implantitis-related bony defects could improve healing compared to open flap debridement (OFD) at 36 months.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a multi-centre, randomized clinical trial, 32 individuals received OFD (control group [CG]) and 34 GBR treatment (test group [TG]). Radiographic defect fill (RDF), probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP) suppuration (SUP), mucosal recession (MREC) and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were evaluated at 36 months.

RESULTS

Fifty individuals attended a supportive peri-implant therapy program and completed the 36-month follow-up. GBR treatment resulted in an RDF of 2.13 ± 1.26 mm compared to 1.64 ± 1.54 mm following OFD (p = .18). No difference was found in PPD, BOP, SUP, REC or PROs between the groups. Successful treatment (no additional bone loss, PPD ≤ 5 mm, no BOP and no SUP) was achieved in 46.2% in TG and 20% in CG (p = .053). Treatment results obtained at 12 months were generally maintained up to 36 months. No significant changes were noticed between 12 and 36 months.

CONCLUSIONS

At 36 months, treatment results obtained at 1 year were sustained following both GBR and OFD in patients attending supportive peri-implant therapy. GBR resulted in more RDF and higher composite treatment success rate than OFD (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier [NCT02375750]).

Surgical treatment of peri-implantitis

As utilisation of dental implants continues to rise, so does the incidence of biological complications. When peri-implantitis has already caused extensive bone resorption, the dentist faces the dilemma of which therapy is the most appropriate to maintain the implant. Since non-surgical approaches of peri-implantitis have shown limited effectiveness, the present paper describes different surgical treatment modalities, underlining their indications and limitations. The primary goal in the management of peri-implantitis is to decontaminate the surface of the infected implant and to eliminate deep peri-implant pockets. For this purpose, access flap debridement, with or without resective procedures, has shown to be effective in a large number of cases. These surgical treatments, however, may be linked to post-operative recession of the mucosal margin. In addition to disease resolution, reconstructive approaches also seek to regenerate the bone defect and to achieve re-osseointegration.

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.

Effectiveness of mechanical and chemical decontamination methods for the treatment of dental implant surfaces affected by peri-implantitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess which decontamination method(s) used for the debridement of titanium surfaces (disks and dental implants) contaminated with bacterial, most efficiently eliminate bacterial biofilms.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in four electronic databases between January 1, 2010 and October 31, 2022. The search strategy followed the PICOS format and included only in vitro studies completed on either dental implant or titanium disk samples. The assessed outcome variable consisted of the most effective method(s)-chemical or mechanical- removing bacterial biofilm from titanium surfaces. A meta-analysis was conducted, and data was summarized through single- and multi-level random effects model (p < .05).

RESULTS

The initial search resulted in 5260 articles after the removal of duplicates. After assessment by title, abstract, and full-text review, a total of 13 articles met the inclusion criteria for this review. Different decontamination methods were assessed, including both mechanical and chemical, with the most common method across studies being chlorhexidine (CHX). Significant heterogeneity was noted across the included studies. The meta-analyses only identified a significant difference in biofilm reduction when CHX treatment was compared against PBS. The remaining comparisons did not identify significant differences between the various decontamination methods.

CONCLUSIONS

The present results do not demonstrate that one method of decontamination is superior in eliminating bacterial biofilm from titanium disk and implant surfaces.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Periimplant Mucositis and Periimplantitis: An Overview and Related Controversial Issues

Periimplant mucositis and periimplantitis are common complications of dental implant. This article provides a comprehensive overview of the 2017 World Workshop's new definition, clinical and radiographic presentation, pathogenesis, risk factors, and classification of periimplant diseases. Also, the authors discuss various types of instruments, materials, and techniques commonly used for treatment of nonsurgical and surgical periimplantitis. Lastly, the authors include some controversial topics surrounding this subject.

Factors influencing outcomes of surgical therapy of peri-implantitis: A secondary analysis of 1-year results from a randomized clinical study

AIM

To identify predictors of treatment outcomes following surgical therapy of peri-implantitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing access flap with or without bone replacement graft. Outcomes at 12 months were probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP), soft-tissue recession (REC) and marginal bone level (MBL) change. Multilevel regression analyses were used to identify predictors. We also built an explanatory model for residual signs of inflammation.

RESULTS

Baseline PPD was the most relevant predictor, showing positive associations with final PPD, REC and MBL gain, and negative association with probability of pocket closure. Smokers presented higher residual PPD. Absence of keratinized mucosa at baseline increased the probability of BOP but was otherwise not indicative of outcomes. Plaque at 6 weeks was detrimental in terms of residual PPD and BOP. Treatment allocation had an effect on REC. Final BOP was explained by residual PPD ≥6 mm and plaque at more than two sites.

CONCLUSIONS

Baseline PPD was the most relevant predictor of the outcomes of surgical therapy of peri-implantitis. Pocket closure should be a primary goal of treatment. Bone replacement grafts may be indicated in aesthetically demanding cases to reduce soft-tissue recession. The importance of smoking cessation and patient-performed plaque control is also underlined.

Bone tissue regeneration in peri-implantitis: A systematic review of randomized clinical trials

Objectives

The goal of this systematic review was to analyze, in randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs), regenerative techniques used to treat peri-implantitis (PI).

Methods

Three databases (PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, and On-Line Knowledge Library) were accessed, applying the PICO strategy (Population [P], Intervention [I], Comparison [C], and Outcomes [O]), with the following focused questions: (i) "In patients who received regenerative treatments for peri-implantitis (P), is the regenerative surgical treatment (I) clinically effective and predictable compared to non-regenerative (C) to treat PI (O)?"; and (ii) "In patients who received regenerative treatments for peri-implantitis (P), the regenerative approach (I), compared to non-regenerative (C), significantly increase the prognosis and implant survival rate in the mid- and long-term (O)?" The inclusion criteria were RCTs published in English between 2012 and 2022, with at least a one-year follow-up, which applied regenerative techniques to treat peri-implantitis. Cochrane's collaboration tool for assessing the risk of bias was used.

Main results

Nine articles were included with 404 patients (225 females and 179 males; mean age of 60.44 years). One study evaluated patients after 48 months and another after 88 months. The techniques and devices used were: (i) implantoplasty with Er:YAG laser, (ii) blood concentrate (growth factors), and (iii) EMD, with no statistically significant outcome. Two studies considered the use of titanium granules with a significant increase in radiographic bone identification, whereas regenerative techniques with bone graft (autogenous, alloplastic, and xenograft) were the majority chosen, associated or not, with a collagen membrane. Xenograft had better results radiographically when compared to the autogenous bone graft and presented better results for bone level. There was an overall decrease in bleeding on probing, independent of the control or test group, and a reduction in pocket depth in the groups analyzed. Titanium granules, EMD, Er:YAG laser, and CGF had non-significant results; better results were observed when using bone grafts. The RoB showed a low risk in four studies (44.44%), three with moderate (33.33%), and two with high risk (22.23%).

Conclusion

Surgical regenerative treatment was a predictable option in the management of PI and in improving the clinical parameters of peri-implant tissues in the short term, mainly when using porous titanium granules, alloplastic bone grafts, and xenografts.

Reconstructive Peri-Implantitis Therapy by Using Bovine Bone Substitute with or without Hyaluronic Acid: A Randomized Clinical Controlled Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

The present pilot study aimed to assess clinical and radiographic efficiencies of bovine bone substitute (BBS) merged with hyaluronic acid (HA) in peri-implantits reconstructive surgery.

METHODS

Peri-implantitis (diagnosed 6.03 ± 1.61 years of implant loading) bone defects were randomly treated either with BBS plus HA (test group) or BBS alone (control group). Clinical parameters including peri-implant probing depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP), implant stability (ISQ), and radiographic changes in vertical and horizontal marginal bone (MB) levels were assessed at six months postoperatively. New temporary and permanent screw-retained crowns were made at two weeks and three months postoperatively. Data were analyzed using parametric and non-parametric tests.

RESULTS

In both groups, 75% of patients and 83% of implants achieved treatment success after six months (no BOP, PPD <5 mm, and no further MB loss). Clinical outcomes improved over time within groups; however, without significant difference between them. ISQ value obtained significant increases in the test compared to the control group at six months postoperatively (p < 0.05). The vertical MB gain was significantly greater in the test group compared to the control (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term outcomes suggested that BBS merged with HA could improve clinical and radiographic outcomes in peri-implantitis reconstructive therapy.

Influence of healing time on the outcomes of alveolar ridge preservation using a collagenated bovine bone xenograft: A randomized clinical trial

AIM

To evaluate the healing outcomes in non-molar post-extraction sockets filled with deproteinized bovine bone mineral with collagen (DBBM-C) as a function of time.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients in need of non-molar tooth extraction were randomly allocated into one of three groups according to the total healing time (A-3 months; B-6 months; C-9 months). The effect of alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) therapy via socket filling using DBBM-C and socket sealing with a porcine collagen matrix (CM) was assessed based on a panel of clinical, digital, histomorphometric, implant-related, and patient-reported outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 42 patients completed the study (n = 14 in each group). Histomorphometric analysis of bone core biopsies obtained at the time of implant placement showed a continuous increase in the proportion of mineralized tissue with respect to non-mineralized tissue, and a decrease in the proportion of remaining xenograft material over time. All volumetric bone and soft tissue contour assessments revealed a dimensional reduction of the alveolar ridge overtime affecting mainly the facial aspect. Linear regression analyses indicated that baseline buccal bone thickness is a strong predictor of bone and soft tissue modelling. Ancillary bone augmentation at the time of implant placement was needed in 16.7% of the sites (A:2; B:1; C:4). Patient-reported discomfort and wound healing index scores progressively decreased over time and was similar across groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Healing time influences the proportion of tissue compartments in non-molar post-extraction sites filled with DBBM-C and sealed with a CM. A variable degree of alveolar ridge atrophy, affecting mainly the facial aspect, occurs even after performing ARP therapy. These changes are more pronounced in sites exhibiting thin facial bone (≤1 mm) at baseline (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03659617).

The efficacy of bone reconstructive therapies in the management of peri-implantitis. A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of bone reconstructive procedures for the reduction of probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP), and suppuration in peri-implantitis-related bone defects at ≥12-month follow-up.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) that compared bone reconstructive therapies to access flap surgery (AFS) (Focused Question-FQ 1), and RCTs, CCTs, and prospective case series that assessed the efficacy of reconstructive therapies (FQ 2). Meta-analysis was performed for FQ1 when more than three studies were identified, while for FQ2 a network was drawn based on RCTs with common treatment arms.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs were identified for FQ1 while five RCTs and six prospective case series for FQ2. There was no significant difference in PPD change between AFS and reconstructive surgery (-0.387; p = .325) at 12 months. Furthermore, no clear differences in terms of PPD and BOP changes resulted from the different reconstructive therapies included in the network. Only a small percentage of treated cases with any modality achieved peri-implantitis resolution, as defined by different composite outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Reconstructive surgery does not offer significant improvements in peri-implant clinical parameters as compared to AFS at 12 months. It was not possible to establish a hierarchy of efficacy among the different biomaterials employed for reconstructive surgery.

Reconstructive treatment of peri-implant defects-Results after three and five years

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the long-term efficacy of reconstructive treatment of peri-implantitis intraosseous defects.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Peri-implant intraosseous defects were augmented using either an autogenous bone graft (AB) or a bovine-derived xenograft (BDX) in combination with a collagen membrane. Maintenance was provided every third month.

RESULTS

In the AB group, 16 patients with 25 implants remained at year five. In the BDX group, 23 patients with 38 implants remained. Between baseline and year 5, bleeding on probing (BOP) and probing pocket depth (PPD) scores were reduced in both groups (p < .001). In the AB and BDX groups, mean PPD between baseline and year five was reduced by 1.7 and 2.8 mm, respectively. The difference between groups was significant (p < .001). In the AB group, the mean bone level change at implant level between baseline and years three and five was-0,2 and -0.7 mm, respectively. In the BDX group, the mean bone level change at implant level between baseline and years three and five was 1.6 and 1.6 mm, respectively. The difference between the groups was significant (p < .001). Successful treatment (no bone loss, no probing pocket depth (PPD) > 5 mm, no suppuration, maximum one implant surface with bleeding on probing (BOP) at year five) was obtained in 9/25 implants (36%) in the AB group and in 29/37 implants (78.3%) in the BDX group.

CONCLUSIONS

Reconstructive surgical treatment of peri-implant defects using BDX resulted in more predictable outcomes than using autogenous bone over 5 years.

Comparison of Different Chemical and Mechanical Modalities for Implant Surface Decontamination: Activity against Biofilm and Influence on Cellular Regrowth—An In Vitro Study

Objectives

The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the efficacy of chemical and mechanical methods for decontamination of titanium dental implant surfaces previously infected with polymicrobial biofilms in a model simulating a peri-implant defect. Furthermore, the effect of each decontamination protocol on MG-63 osteoblast-like cells morphology and adhesion to the treated implants was assessed.

Background

Peri-implantitis is a growing issue in dentistry, and evidence about implant surface decontamination procedures is lacking and inconclusive.

Methods

A total of 40 previously biofilm-contaminated implants were placed into a custom-made model simulating a peri-implant defect and randomly assigned to five treatment groups: (C) control (no treatment); (AW) air abrasion without any powder; (ESC) air abrasion with powder of erythritol, amorphous silica, and 0.3% chlorhexidine; (HBX) decontamination with a sulfonic/sulfuric acid solution in gel; and (HBX + ESC) a combination of HBX and ESC. Microbiological analysis was performed on five implants per treatment group, and the residual viable bacterial load measured in log 10 CFU/mL was counted for each bacterial strain and for the total number of colonies. The remaining three implants per group and three noncontaminated (NC) implants were used to assess surface biocompatibility using a scanning electron microscope and a backscattered electron microscope after seeding with MG-63 cells.

Results

A significant decontaminant effect was achieved using HBX or HBX + ESC, while no differences were observed among other groups. The percentage of implant surface covered by adherent MG-63 cells was influenced by the treatment method. Progressive increases in covered surfaces were observed in groups C, AW, ESC, HBX, HBX + ESC, and NC.

Conclusions

A combination of mechanical and chemical decontamination may provide more predictable results than mechanical cleaning alone.

Reconstructive surgical therapy of peri-implantitis: A multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the potential benefit of the use of a bone substitute material in the reconstructive surgical therapy of peri-implantitis.

METHODS

In this multicenter randomized clinical trial, 138 patients (147 implants) with peri-implantitis were treated surgically, randomized by coin toss to either a control (access flap surgery) or a test group (reconstructive surgery using bone substitute material). Clinical assessments, including probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding and suppuration on probing (BOP & SOP) as well as soft tissue recession (REC), were recorded at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Marginal bone levels (MBL), measured on intra-oral radiographs, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were recorded at baseline and 12 months. No blinding to group allocation was performed. The primary outcome at 12 months was a composite measure including (i) implant not lost, (ii) absence of BOP/SOP at all aspects, (iii) PPD ≤5 mm at all aspects and (iv) ≤1 mm recession of mucosal margin on the buccal aspect of the implant. Secondary outcomes included (i) changes of MBL, (ii) changes of PPD, BOP%, and buccal KM, (iii) buccal REC and (iv) patient-reported outcomes.

RESULTS

During follow-up, four implants (one in the test group, three in the control group) in four patients were removed due to disease progression. At 12 months, a total of 69 implants in the test and 68 implants in the control group were examined. Thus, 16.4% and 13.5% of implants in the test and control group, respectively, met all predefined criteria of the composite outcome. PPD reduction and MBL gain were 3.7 mm and about 1.0 mm in both groups. Reduction in mean BOP% varied between 45% (test) and 50% (control), without significant differences between groups. Buccal REC was less pronounced in the test group (M = 0.7, SD = 0.9 mm) when compared to controls (M = 1.1, SD = 1.5 mm). PROs were favorable in both groups without significant differences. One case of allergic reaction to the antibiotic therapy was recorded. No other adverse events were noted.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical therapy of peri-implantitis effectively improved the clinical and radiographic status at 12 months. While the use of a bone substitute material did not improve reductions of PPD and BOP, buccal REC was less pronounced in the test group. Patient satisfaction was high in both groups.

Efficacy of concentrated growth factor versus collagen membrane in reconstructive surgical therapy of peri-implantitis: 3-year results of a randomized clinical trial

Objectives

To compare the 3-year clinical and radiographic outcomes of two different reconstructive surgical management of peri-implantitis using a bone substitute in combination with either concentrated growth factor (CGF) or collagen membrane (CM).

Material and methods

Fifty-one patients who had at least one implant presenting peri-implantitis with an intrabony defect were filled with a xenogenic bone grafting material and covered either CGF or CM. Clinical and radiographic assessments were carried out at baseline and postoperative years 1 and 3. Three different composite outcomes were defined to evaluate treatment success at a 3-year follow-up. The effects of possible prognostic indicators on treatment success were identified by using multilevel regression analysis.

Results

The changes in probing depth (PD) and radiographic vertical defect depth (VDD) between baseline and year 1 and baseline and year 3 presented significantly greater decreases for the CM group in comparison with the CGF group (p < 0.05). No significant differences between the two treatment modalities were demonstrated regarding treatment success outcomes. History of periodontitis, VDD at baseline, and the number of intrabony defect walls revealed significant impacts on treatment success (p = 0.033; OR = 3.50, p = 0.039; OR = 0.975, and p = 0.024; OR = 7.0 and p = 0.019;OR = 6.0, respectively).

Conclusions

CM in combination with a bone substitute seems to have slightly better outcomes compared to the CGF membranes in reconstructive surgical therapy of peri-implantitis. The history of periodontitis, baseline VDD, and peri-implant bone defect configuration could be possible predictors influencing treatment success.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04769609.

Clinical relevance

For the reconstruction of peri-implant bone defects, using a bone substitute in combination with a collagen membrane may show more favorable outcomes.

Surgical therapy of peri-implantitis

Peri-implantitis is caused by a bacterial challenge; therefore, anti-infective treatment strategies should be employed to manage the disease. As nonsurgical approaches demonstrate limited efficacy in most cases of peri-implantitis, surgical interventions are often required. Treatment outcomes improve following access flap surgery, with or without adjunctive resective and/or augmentation measures. Whereas nonaugmentative therapies (ie, access flap surgery and resective techniques) primarily aim to resolve inflammation and arrest further disease progression, augmentation approaches also seek to regenerate the bony defect and achieve reosseointegration. Currently, limited evidence supports the superiority of augmentative surgical techniques for peri-implantitis treatment over nonaugmentation methods, and human histologic evidence for reosseointegration is sparse. For patients involved in regular postoperative maintenance programs, success of peri-implantitis surgical treatment based on various definitions of success was obtained in over half of the cases after 5-7 years. Despite surgical treatment, cases of further disease progression that required retreatment or led to implant loss were reported.

Papilla preservation and minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of peri-implant osseous defects. Clinical and radiographic outcomes of a 5-year retrospective study

OBJECTIVES

Evaluate in a case series the clinical applicability of a regenerative approach for treatment of peri-implant lesions based on papilla preservation flaps (PPF) and minimally invasive surgery (MIST).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twenty-one deep peri-implant defects in 21 patients were surgically accessed applying PPF and MIST. The exposed implant surface was decontaminated with the sequential application of mechanical devices and chemical agents. Bone substitutes alone or in combination with a collagen barrier were applied, according to the anatomy of the peri-implant lesion. Clinical and radiographic measurements were collected at baseline, post-surgery, 1 and 5 years.

RESULTS

Primary wound closure was obtained in 100% of the sites and maintained in 90% of the sites at 1 week. Bleeding on probing (BOP) was reduced from 100% at baseline to 28.6% at 1 year and to 42.8% at 5 years. The 1-year pocket reduction was 3.9 ± 1 mm. Residual probing depths (PD) were 4.1 ± 0.9 mm. PD remained stable up to 5 years. The radiographic bone gain was 2.5 ± 1.2 mm (mesial) and 2.5 ± 1.1 (distal) at 1-year and 2.3 ± 1.3 mm (mesial) and 2.6 ± 1.4 mm (distal) at 5 years. The radiographic resolution of the defect was 70.4% ± 19% (mesial) and 70.2% ± 22% (distal) at 1 year and 64.2% ± 21% (mesial) and 67.7% ± 21% (distal) at 5 years. All implants survived up to 5 years. A composite outcome of disease resolution shows consistent 1-year clinical improvements at all the treated sites and substantial 5-year stability.

CONCLUSIONS

PPF and MIST can be successfully applied for the regenerative treatment of peri-implant defects.

Changes in peri-implant soft tissue levels following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To assess the changes in peri-implant soft tissue levels after the surgical treatment of peri-implantitis.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials, cohort studies and case series, evaluating the changes in the position of the mucosal margin before and after surgical treatment of peri-implantitis, were searched. Secondary outcomes were changes in keratinized mucosa (KM), radiographic bone levels, probing depths (PD), plaque indices, bleeding on probing and patient perception. Meta-analyses were performed to determine weighted mean differences (WMD) or effects (WME).

RESULTS

Twenty-six articles, reporting 20 investigations, were included. Reconstructive approaches yielded significantly less increase in mucosal recession, when compared to access flaps (n = 3, WMD = -1.35 mm, 95% confidence interval [CI] [-2.62; -0.07], p = .038). When comparing among reconstructive surgical interventions similar outcomes were observed irrespective of the use of a barrier membrane (n = 3, WMD = -0.01 mm, 95% CI [-0.15; 0.13], p = .917). When considering the effects over time, limited mucosal recession was observed after reconstructive procedures (n = 23, WME = 0.389 mm, 95% CI [0.204; 0.574]), p = .001), while increased recession was reported with either resective or access flap surgery (n = 6, WME = 1.21 mm, 95% CI [0.70; 1.72], p = <.001; and n = 3, WME = 0.95 mm, 95% CI [0.20; 2.10], p = .106; respectively). When resective and reconstructive approaches were combined the highest values on peri-implant recession were reported (n = 2, WME = 1.97 mm, 95% CI [0.81; 3.14], p < .001). Reconstructive surgical interventions were associated with greater radiographic bone level gains, while similar values were reported for PD reduction when comparing reconstructive, access and resective procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Resective surgical procedures were associated with significant post-surgical recession while minimal recession was observed in regenerative interventions.

Peri-Implantitis Regenerative Therapy: A Review

Simple Summary

Regenerative therapies are one of the options to treat peri-implantitis diseases that cause peri-implant bone loss. This review reports classic and current literature to describe the available knowledge on regenerative peri-implant techniques.

Abstract

The surgical techniques available to clinicians to treat peri-implant diseases can be divided into resective and regenerative. Peri-implant diseases are inflammatory conditions affecting the soft and hard tissues around dental implants. Despite the large number of investigations aimed at identifying the best approach to treat these conditions, there is still no universally recognized protocol to solve these complications successfully and predictably. This review will focus on the regenerative treatment of peri-implant osseous defects in order to provide some evidence that can aid clinicians in the approach to peri-implant disease treatment.

Reconstructive treatment of peri-implantitis infrabony defects of various configurations: 5-year survival and success

Aim

To present the 5 years outcomes of a reconstructive surgical protocol for peri‐implantitis defects with different morphologies, by means of deproteinized bovine bone mineral with 10% collagen (DBBMC).

Material and Methods

The original population of this case series consisted of 75 patients with one crater‐like defect and probing depth (PD) ≥6 mm. After flap elevation, defects were assigned to one characteristic class and treated by means of DBBMC. Following healing, patients were enrolled in an individualized supportive periodontal/peri‐implant (SPT) program.

Results

Fifty‐one patients reached the 5 years examination, as 11 patients were lost to follow‐up and 13 implants were removed. Overall treatment success was registered in 29 patients (45.3%). Mean PD and BOP significantly decreased at one year and remained stable for the rest of observation period. No correlation was found between implant survival rate and defect configuration (p = 0.213). Patients, who did not fully adhere to the SPT, experienced more complications and implant loss than those who regularly attended recall appointments (p = 0.009).

Conclusions

The proposed reconstructive treatment resulted in a high 5 years implant survival rate in patients who fully adhered to SPT. The resolution of the peri‐implantitis defect does not seem significantly associated with the defect configuration at the time of treatment.

Surgical treatment of peri-implantitis with or without a deproteinized bovine bone mineral and a native bilayer collagen membrane: A randomized clinical trial

AIM

To assess whether the use of deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) and native bilayer collagen membrane (NBCM) improved healing of peri-implantitis-related bone defects at 12 months.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a multi-centre, randomized clinical trial, 32 individuals received surgical debridement (control group [CG]), and 34 received adjunct use of DBBM and NBCM (test group [TG]). Radiographic defect fill (RDF), probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP), suppuration (SUP), recession (REC), cytokines (IL-1β, IL-1RA, IL-6, IL-8, IL-12, IP10, PDGF-BB, TNF-α, VEGF), and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were evaluated at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months.

RESULTS

RDF at the deepest site amounted 2.7 ± 1.3 mm in TG and 1.4 ± 1.2 mm in CG (p <.0001). PPD was reduced by 1.9 mm in TG and 2.3 mm in CG (p = .5783). There were no significant differences between groups regarding reductions of BOP, SUP, REC, cytokines levels, or oral health impact profile (OHIP)-14 scores at 12 months. Successful treatment (RDF ≥ 1.0 mm, PPD ≤5 mm, ≤1/4 site with BOP grade 1, no SUP) was identified in 32% in TG and 21% in CG.

CONCLUSIONS

DBBM and NBCM resulted in significantly more RDF than debridement alone. No difference was found in any clinical parameters or PROs between the groups. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02375750.

Early peri-implant bone loss as a predictor for peri-implantitis: A 10-year prospective cohort study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effect of early bone loss (EBL), on long-term bone stability and future peri-implantitis development.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients referred for implant placement between 2005 and 2009 were consecutively treated and followed for 10 years. After 10 years, patients were invited for a scientific diagnostic visit to evaluate implant survival and bone loss. Bone level changes were compared with baseline. Non-parametric testing was performed in cross-tabs (Pearson Chi-square and Fishers's exact test). Kaplan-Meier-estimated survival curves were plotted for different thresholds for EBL at different timepoints. Generalized linear mixed models with binomial distribution and logit link for peri-implantitis were fitted. An adjusted logistic mixed model was made to evaluate peri-implantitis, in relation with smoking status, history of periodontitis, and EBL > 0.5 mm.

RESULTS

Four hundred and seven patients (mean age of 64.86 years [range 28-92, SD 10.11]), with 1482 implants, responded to the 10-year recall invitation. After an average follow-up time of 10.66 years (range 10-14, SD 0.87), implant survival was 94.74%. Mean crestal bone loss after 10 years was 0.81 mm (SD 1.58, range 0.00-17.00). One hundred and seventy five implants in 76 patients had peri-implantitis (11.8% on implant level, 18.7% on patient level). EBL of 0.5, 1, and 2 mm were significant predictors for peri-implantitis and implant loss after 10 years. Implants with EBL ≥0.5 mm during the first year of function showed a 5.43 times higher odds for future peri-implantitis development. Probability in developing peri-implantitis was 52.06% when smoking, Periodontal history and EBL of >0.5 mm was combined.

CONCLUSION

The present study suggests that EBL is a predictor for long-term peri-implant pathology, with a significant higher risk for peri-implantitis when early bone loss exceeds the thresholds of 0.5 and 1 mm, especially when additional risk factors such as smoking or susceptibility for periodontal disease prior to implant treatment are present. Clinical trial registration number B670201524796.

Resolution of peri-implantitis by means of implantoplasty as adjunct to surgical therapy: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of data on the effectiveness of implantoplasty as adjunct to the surgical management of peri-implantitis.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the resolution of peri-implantitis by means of implantoplasty as adjunct to surgical resective (RES) and reconstructive (REC) therapies and supportive maintenance.

METHODS

Patients that underwent surgical therapy to manage peri-implantitis with a follow-up of ≥12 months and enrolled in a regular peri-implant supportive care were recruited. RES group consisted of two interventions that included osseous recontouring and apically position flap (APF) and soft tissue conditioning (STC). REC was performed in the infra-osseous compartment of combined defects. Implant survival rate was recorded. Clinical and radiographic parameters were evaluated to define a "dogmatic" (case definition #1) and a "flexible" (case definition #2) therapeutic success. Univariate and multivariate multilevel backward logistic regression were applied for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 43 patients (n_implants  = 135) were retrospectively assessed. Mean observational period was ∼24 months. Implant survival rate was 97.8%, being significantly higher for APF, STC, and APF + STC (RES) when compared with REC (P = 0.01) therapy, in particular for advanced lesions (>50% of bone loss). The overall therapeutic success rate at implant-level was 66% and 79.5% for case definition #1 and #2, respectively. APF group displayed more efficient disease resolution when considered success definition #1 (72%). Contrarily, when the data were adhered to success definition #2, STC group showed a slightly higher disease resolution rate (87%). For RES group, location, favoring anterior (P = 0.04) and defect type, favoring class II (P = 0.02) displayed statistical significance for therapeutic success. For REC group, implants exhibiting a wider band of keratinized mucosa (KM) demonstrated higher therapeutic success (P = 0.008).

CONCLUSION

Implantoplasty as an adjunct to surgical therapy proved effective in terms of disease resolution and implant survival rate. Implant location, defect morphology as well as the buccal width of KM are indicators of therapeutic success.

Surgical and non-surgical debridement for the treatment of peri-implantitis: a two-center 12-month randomized trial

OBJECTIVES

To compare surgical (ST) and non-surgical (NST) debridement for the treatment of peri-implantitis in a two-center randomized trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-five individuals with 63 implants with probing depth (PPD) ≥5mm, bleeding on probing (BOP), and radiographic bone loss ≥2mm were included. In the NST (30 implants), submucosal debridement was performed. In the ST (33 implants), a mucoperiosteal flap was raised and surfaces were decontaminated only by debridement as performed in NST. Clinical parameters and radiographs were compared at baseline and after 12 months. Means and standard errors were reported.

RESULTS

PPD considering all implant sites reduced significantly in NST from 4.14±0.25 to 3.25±0.18mm. In ST, PPD also significantly changed (3.74±0.22 to 3.00±0.29mm). No significant differences were observed between the two groups. For deep sites (≥7mm), PPD was 7.82±0.20mm at baseline and reduced to 5.10±0.30mm in NST, while in ST group, it was 7.11±0.11mm and changed to 5.22±0.91mm (between-groups p value=0.51). BOP significantly reduced from ~60 to 35% of all sites in both groups, without significant differences between them. When sites with radiographic bone level ≥3mm at baseline were analyzed, there was a significant difference between groups in bone gain after 12 months in favor of ST (ST=0.78±0.30mm compared to NST=0.25mm±0.13; p=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical and non-surgical debridement for the treatment of peri-implantitis present similar clinical outcomes. Bone levels were better improved in ST than NST for sites with higher initial bone loss.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The treatment of peri-implantitis is still a challenge in clinical practice, since less than half of affected implants achieve health after surgical or non-surgical debridement. Considering the lack of clinically relevant differences between these two treatments, non-surgical debridement should be considered the first therapeutic choice for peri-implantitis, mainly mild to moderate cases.

Peri-Implantitis: A Clinical Update on Prevalence and Surgical Treatment Outcomes

Dental implants may be considered a reliable routine procedure in clinical practice for the replacement of missing teeth. Results from long-term studies indicate that implant-supported dental prostheses constitute a predictable treatment method for the management of fully and partially edentulous patients. Implants and their restorations, however, are not free from biological complications. In fact, peri-implantitis, defined as progressive bone loss associated to clinical inflammation, is not a rare finding nowadays. This constitutes a concern for clinicians and patients given the negative impact on the quality of life and the sequelae originated by peri-implantitis lesions. The purpose of this narrative review is to report on the prevalence of peri-implantitis and to overview the indications, contraindications, complexity, predictability and effectiveness of the different surgical therapeutic modalities to manage this disorder.

Changes in the surface topography and element proportion of clinically failed SLA implants after in vitro debridement by different methods

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the surface topography and element proportion changes in clinically failed implants after different modalities in vitro debridement and to compare the cleaning effect of different method combinations.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Thirty clinical failed implants were treated by different debridement methods in vitro as follows: Group 1: physiologic saline irrigation; Group 2: glycine powder air polishing; Group 3: glycine powder air polishing + ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA); Group 4: polyetheretherketone (PEEK) tip ultrasonic scaling; and Group 5: PEEK tip ultrasonic scaling + EDTA. The relative contaminated area reduction (RCAR), visual analogue scale (VAS, the higher value means, the better cleaning effect) and surface roughness were assessed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), stereoscopic microscopy (SM) and white light interferometry (WLI). Surface chemistry was determined by energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS).

RESULTS

Group 4 and Group 5 showed higher RCARs (82.90%, 82.89%), VAS scores (2.61, 2.33) and roughness reductions (-0.85 μm, -1.80 μm). Group 3 attained the highest decrease of C% (carbon, -26.67%), O% (oxygen, -13.71%) and N% (nitrogen, -5.66%), and the highest increase of Ti% (titanium, 49.67%). PEEK remnants were detected on the implant surface of Groups 4 and 5.

CONCLUSION

Within the limitation of the present in vitro design, PEEK tip ultrasonic scaling was more effective in eliminating visible contamination, while glycine powder air polishing combined with EDTA treatment was more conducive to expose the original surface element distribution. Both methods have their own advantages in decontamination, but none of them could reconstruct the surface as the pristine implant.

Sub-Periosteal Peri-Implant Augmented Layer Technique to Treat Peri-Implantitis Lesions

INTRODUCTION

The efficacy of surgical regenerative procedures to treat peri-implantitis lesions has been extensively reviewed. Regenerative treatment showed a variable rate of success, in terms of pocket reduction, gain in bone support, and elimination of signs of infection/inflammation. The aim of the present case report is to illustrate the use of the sub-periosteal peri-implant augmented layer (SPAL) technique to correct peri-implantitis defects CASE PRESENTATION: Surgical treatment of three class Ib and one class Ic peri-implantitis lesions in three patients was performed by means of the SPAL technique. A partial-thickness flap was elevated, leaving the periosteal layer on the buccal cortical bone plate. The periosteal layer was in turn elevated to create a pouch, which was used to stabilize a bovine-derived xenograft (deproteinized bovine bone mineral) at the peri-implant buccal bone defect. No barrier membrane was used. In case of insufficient dimensions of peri-implant mucosa, a connective tissue graft (CTG) was buccally positioned at the most coronal portion of the implant. Treatment resulted in substantial reconstruction of peri-implant support associated with reduced probing depth and absence of inflammation.

CONCLUSIONS

SPAL technique with or without additional CTG may be a suitable option to obtain clinical remission of peri-implantitis defects associated with buccal bone dehiscence.

Peri-Implant Diseases: Diagnosis, Clinical, Histological, Microbiological Characteristics and Treatment Strategies. A Narrative Review

Since the use of dental implants is continuously increasing, it is imperative for dental practitioners to understand the nature and treatment of peri-implant diseases. The purpose of this manuscript is to comprehensively review peri-implant diseases, their characteristics, as well as their non-surgical and surgical treatment. To that end, the current literature was searched and a narrative review was conducted. It is essential that the case definitions described in the 2017 World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-implant Diseases and Conditions are used to diagnose and classify peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. While recent epidemiologic studies on peri-implant diseases exist, there is great heterogeneity in the definition of these conditions. Several risk factors and indicators are reported in the literature, with smoking and diabetes being the most universally accepted. In peri-implant mucositis, non-surgical treatment seems to be sufficient. However, for the treatment of peri-implantitis, a surgical approach, which includes open-flap debridement, apically positioned flap and guided bone regeneration, is considered more appropriate. A great variety of adjuncts to mechanical treatment have been reported with controversial results. Finally, studies comparing results from different peri-implantitis treatments are warranted in randomized controlled clinical trials in order to provide stronger evidence-based approaches.

Characteristics and frequency distribution of bone defect configurations in peri-implantitis lesions-A series of 193 cases

Background

Knowledge on peri‐implantitis bone defect characteristics and predictors is still limited.

Purpose

To describe peri‐implantitis bone defect characteristics and identify possible predictors.

Methods

Various parameters at patient‐ (age, gender, smoking, and supra‐structure), implant‐ (surface, type, connection, platform, and misfit), and site level (region, alveolar ridge position, defect characteristics, neighboring structure) were recorded retrospectively.

Results

Among 193 implants, the most prevalent defects were class Ic (25.4%), and Id (23.8%); a previously non‐described category “class Id with only one bone wall” was frequently observed (11.9%). Mean intrabony defect depth and width ranged from 4.5 to 6.2 mm and from 2.7 to 2.9 mm, respectively; mean dehiscence extent ranged from 2.8 to 7.0 mm. A total of 37.8% of the defects presented horizontal bone loss and an intrabony component; in 52.7% of the implants, total defect extent was >6 mm. Jaw region, implant position within the alveolar ridge, and implant/abutment misfit showed significant associations either to defect configuration and/or defect extent.

Conclusion

(a) Most common peri‐implantitis defects exhibited a combination of intrabony component and a buccal/oral dehiscence, while purely circumferential defects were relatively seldom; (b) implants with defects with bone dehiscence were placed more frequently closer to the lateral aspect of the ridge harboring the dehiscence; (c) implants placed in the lower anterior region had the highest risk for more severe peri‐implant bone loss; and (d) peri‐implant bone defects with only a single bone wall appropriate for regenerative procedure were relatively frequent.

Significance of implant design on the efficacy of different peri-implantitis decontamination protocols

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy of three mechanical decontamination methods in four types of commercially available implants.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Ninety-six implants of four commercial brands with different designs (regarding thread depth and thread pitch) were soaked in a surrogate biofilm (ink) and air-dried. Circumferential standardized peri-implant defects with 6 mm in depth and 1.55 mm in width were custom-made with a 3D printer. Stained implants were inserted in the defects and instrumented with three different methods: a titanium brush (TNB), a metallic ultrasonic tip (IST) and an air abrasive (PF). Standardized photographs were taken vertically to the implant axis (flat view), and with angulations of 60° (upper view) and 120° (lower view) to the implant long axis. The percentage of residual stain (PRS) was calculated with the image analysis software. Scanning electron microscope evaluations were performed on the buccal aspect of the implants at the central level of the defect.

RESULTS

The efficacy of PF was significantly inferior to the TNB and IST in all implant designs, while there were no significant differences between TNB and IST. IST showed significantly higher PRS in the implant with the highest thread pitch, while the TNB had the highest PRS in the implant with a marked reverse buttress-thread design. The micro-thread design had the lowest values of PRS for all decontamination methods. The apically facing threads represented the areas with highest PRS for all implant designs and decontamination methods.

CONCLUSION

Thread geometry influenced the access of the decontamination devices and in turn its efficacy. Implants with lower thread pitch and thread depth values appeared to have less residual staining.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Clinicians must be aware of the importance of thread geometry in the decontamination efficacy.

Impact of bone defect morphology on the outcome of reconstructive treatment of peri-implantitis

OBJECTIVES

To assess if (I) the alveolar bone defect configuration at dental implants diagnosed with peri-implantitis is related to clinical parameters at the time of surgical intervention and if (II) the outcome of surgical intervention of peri-implantitis is dependent on defect configuration at the time of treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a prospective study, 45 individuals and 74 dental implants with ≥ 2 bone wall defects were treated with either an autogenous bone transplant or an exogenous bone augmentation material. Defect fill was assessed at 1 year.

RESULTS

At baseline, no significant study group differences were identified. Most study implants (70.7%, n = 53) had been placed in the maxilla. Few implants were placed in molar regions. The mesial and distal crestal width at surgery was greater at 4-wall defects than at 2-wall defects (p = 0.001). Probing depths were also greater at 4-wall defects than at 2-wall defects (p = 0.01). Defect fill was correlated to initial defect depth (p < 0.001). Defect fill at 4-wall defects was significant (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

(I) The buccal-lingual width of the alveolar bone crest was explanatory to defect configuration, (II) 4-wall defects demonstrated more defect fill, and (III) deeper defects resulted in more defect fill.

Successful Management of Peri-Implantitis around Short and Ultrashort Single-Crown Implants: A Case Series with a 3-Year Follow-Up

Introduction and Aim

In case of peri-implantitis, resective surgery is contraindicated for short and ultrashort implants, limiting the treatment options to regenerative surgery or to implant removal. This retrospective case series presents the clinical and radiographic outcomes of a surgical regenerative procedure to treat peri-implantitis around short and ultrashort implants.

Materials and Methods

The study is a retrospective evaluation of patients suffering from peri-implantitis and those who underwent access flap surgery, concomitant chemical and mechanical decontamination of implant surface, and bone grafting using a self-hardening mixture of bone substitutes and biphasic calcium sulfate. No membranes were applied to cover the grafting material, and primary tension-free closure was achieved. The retrospective protocol was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee for Clinical Sperimentation (CESC) of Verona and Rovigo, Italy (based in the University of Verona) (Prog. 1863CESC. Date of approval: 2018-07-04).

Results

15 patients (17 implants) have been diagnosed with peri-implantitis after a mean follow-up of 24 months after loading. Implant length was between 5 and 8 mm. 8 patients (10 implants) had a history of periodontitis. At baseline, the mean PD (probing pocket dept) at the deepest site was 8.12 mm, with an average mBI (modified bleeding index) of 2.35 and a mean BD (bone defect depth) of 3.04 mm. At the 3-year follow-up, the CSR was 100%, the mean mBI was 0.88 (average reduction: −1.47), the mean PD was 3.35 mm (mean PD reduction: 4.77 mm), and the mean bone defect was reduced by 1.74 mm, with a mean bone fill of 55%.

Conclusions

The results of the present case series suggest that if accurate surface decontamination is achieved, high survival rate and good clinical and radiographic results can be obtained after 3 years. However, only the histological examination could confirm the growth of new bone in direct contact with the implant surface or if the grafted material only fills the space left by the peri-implant defect.

Accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography, dental magnetic resonance imaging, and intraoral radiography for detecting peri-implant bone defects at single zirconia implants-An in vitro study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the diagnostic value of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), intraoral radiography (IR), and dental magnetic resonance imaging (dMRI) for detecting and classifying peri-implant bone defects at zirconia implants.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-eight zirconia implants were inserted in bovine ribs, 24 of which had standardized defects (1-wall, 2-wall, 3-wall, 4-wall) in two sizes (1 and 3 mm). CBCT, IR, and dMRI were performed and analyzed twice by four readers unaware of the nature of the defects. Cohen's and Fleiss' kappa (κ), sensitivity, and specificity were calculated for the presence/absence of bone defects, defect size, and defect type. Cochran's Q-test with post hoc McNemar was used to test for statistical differences.

RESULTS

A high intra- and inter-reader reliability (κ range: 0.832-1) and sensitivity/specificity (IR: 0.97/0.96; CBCT: 0.99/1; dMRI: 1/0.99) for bone defect detection were observed for all three imaging methods. For defect type classification, intra- (κ range: 0.505-0.778) and inter-reader (κ: 0.411) reliability of IR were lower compared to CBCT (κ range intrareader: 0.667-0.889; κ inter-reader: 0.629) and dMRI (κ range intrareader: 0.61-0.832; κ inter-reader: 0.712). The sensitivity for correct defect type classification was not significantly different for CBCT (0.81) and dMRI (0.83; p = 1), but was significantly lower for IR (0.68; vs. CBCT p = 0.003; vs. dMRI p = 0.004). The sensitivity advantage of CBCT and dMRI for defect classification was smaller for 1-mm defects (CBCT/dMRI/IR: 0.68/0.72/0.63, no significant difference) than for 3-mm defects (CBCT/dMRI/IR: 0.95/0.94/0.74; CBCT vs. IR p = 0.0001; dMRI vs. IR p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

Within the limitations of an in vitro study, IR can be recommended as the initial imaging method for evaluating peri-implant bone defects at zirconia implants. CBCT provides higher diagnostic accuracy of defect classification at the expense of higher cost and radiation dose. Dental MRI may be a promising imaging method for evaluating peri-implant bone defects at zirconia implants in the future.

Surgical Regenerative Treatments for Peri-Implantitis: Meta-analysis of Recent Findings in a Systematic Literature Review

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of the present study was to systematically review the literature on the surgical regenerative treatment of the peri-implantitis and to determine an effective therapeutic predictable option for their clinical management.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study searched MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from 2006 to 2016. Clinical human studies that had reported changes in probing depth (PD) and/or bleeding on probing (BOP) and/or radiologic marginal bone level (RBL) changes after peri-implantitis surgical treatment at 12-month follow-up or longer were included accordingly to PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

The initial search obtained 883 citations. After screening and determination of eligibility, 18 articles were included in the review. The meta-analysis of selected studies revealed that the weighted mean RBL fill was 1.97 mm (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.58 to 2.35 mm), PD reduction was 2.78 mm (95% CI = 2.31 to 3.25 mm), and BOP reduced by 52.5% (95% CI = 41.6 to 63.1%). Defect fill in studies using and not using barrier membranes for graft coverage was 1.86 mm (95% CI = 1.36 to 2.36 mm) and 2.12 mm (95% CI = 1.46 to 2.78 mm) correspondingly. High heterogeneity among the studies regarding defects morphology, surgical protocols, and selection of biomaterials were found.

CONCLUSIONS

All included studies underlined an improvement of clinical conditions after the surgical regenerative treatment of peri-implantitis, however, there is a lack of scientific evidence in the literature regarding the superiority of the regenerative versus non-regenerative surgical treatment. The presence of a barrier membrane or submergence in the regenerative procedure does not seem to be fundamental in order to obtain clinical success of the surgery.