1
|
Esplin KC, Tsai YW, Vela K, Diogenes A, Hachem LE, Palaiologou A, Cochran DL, Kotsakis GA. Peri-implantitis induction and resolution around zirconia versus titanium implants. J Periodontol 2024. [PMID: 39003566 DOI: 10.1002/jper.23-0573] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/09/2023] [Revised: 02/15/2024] [Accepted: 03/18/2024] [Indexed: 07/15/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study compared titanium and zirconia implant ligature-induced peri-implant defect progression and response to regenerative surgical intervention. METHODS Eight tissue-level endosseous implants were placed in 6 mixed-breed foxhounds, with 2 zirconia and 2 titanium alternating in each hemimandible. Cotton ligatures were placed subgingivally for 16 weeks followed by 8 weeks of spontaneous progression. Standardized radiographs were captured every 2 weeks to evaluate the rate of bone loss. Regenerative surgery was performed utilizing water-jet decontamination, enamel matrix derivative, and locally harvested autogenous bone. After 16 weeks of healing, final radiographic bone levels as well as probing depths, recession, and clinical attachment levels were assessed. RESULTS All 48 implants integrated successfully. The final average post-ligature radiographic defects were 2.88 and 3.05 mm for titanium and zirconia implants, respectively. There was no significant difference between materials in the rate of radiographic bone loss (p = 0.09). Following regenerative surgery, the total average amount of radiographic bone gain was 1.41 and 1.20 mm for titanium and zirconia, respectively. The percentage of defect fill was 51.56% and 37.98% (p = 0.03) for titanium and zirconia, respectively. Inter-group differences were minimal for clinical parameters at the time of sacrifice including periodontal pocket depths (p = 0.81), recession (p = 0.98), or clinical attachment levels (p = 0.51). CONCLUSIONS No significant difference was found in the rate of peri-implant defect development between titanium and zirconia implants. Both materials gained significant radiographic bone following regenerative surgery with significantly greater defect percentage fill in titanium implants. The final clinical parameters were similar in both groups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kaleb C Esplin
- Department of Periodontics, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA
| | - Yi-Wen Tsai
- ITI Scholarship Center, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA
| | - Kathryn Vela
- Department of Periodontics, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA
| | - Anibal Diogenes
- Department of Endodontics, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA
| | - Lea El Hachem
- Department of Periodontics, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA
| | - Archontia Palaiologou
- Department of Periodontics, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA
| | - David L Cochran
- Department of Periodontics, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA
| | - Georgios A Kotsakis
- Department of Periodontics, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA
- ITI Scholarship Center, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA
- Department of Oral Biology, Rutgers School of Dental Medicine, Newark, New Jersey, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Zhang J, Tong Z, Chen L, Qian Y, Lu Y, Chen Q, Si M. Development and applications of peri-implantitis mouse models. Oral Dis 2024. [PMID: 38501334 DOI: 10.1111/odi.14929] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/07/2024] [Revised: 02/27/2024] [Accepted: 03/06/2024] [Indexed: 03/20/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Peri-implantitis is one of the most common complications of implants. However, its pathogenesis has not been clarified. In recent years, mouse models are gradually being used in the study of peri-implantitis. This review aims to summarize the methods used to induce peri-implantitis in mice and their current applications. METHOD Articles of peri-implantitis mouse models were collected. We analyzed the various methods of inducing peri-implantitis and their application in different areas. RESULTS Most researchers have induced peri-implantitis by silk ligatures. Some others have induced peri-implantitis by Pg gavage and LPS injection. Current applications of peri-implantitis mouse models are in the following areas: investigation of pathogenesis and exploration of new interventions, comparison of peri-implantitis with periodontitis, the interaction between systemic diseases and peri-implantitis, etc. CONCLUSION: Silk ligature for 2-4 weeks, Pg gavage for 6 weeks, and LPS injection for 6 weeks all successfully induced peri-implantitis in mice. Mice have the advantages of mature gene editing technology, low cost, and short time to induce peri-implantitis. It has applications in the study of pathogenesis, non-surgical treatments, and interactions with other diseases. However, compared with large animals, mice also have a number of disadvantages that limit their application.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jianwei Zhang
- Stomatology Hospital, School of Stomatology, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Zhejiang Provincial Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedical Research of Zhejiang Province, Cancer Center of Zhejiang University, Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Devices of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, China
| | - Zian Tong
- Stomatology Hospital, School of Stomatology, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Zhejiang Provincial Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedical Research of Zhejiang Province, Cancer Center of Zhejiang University, Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Devices of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, China
| | - Long Chen
- Stomatology Hospital, School of Stomatology, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Zhejiang Provincial Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedical Research of Zhejiang Province, Cancer Center of Zhejiang University, Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Devices of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, China
| | - Yinjie Qian
- Stomatology Hospital, School of Stomatology, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Zhejiang Provincial Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedical Research of Zhejiang Province, Cancer Center of Zhejiang University, Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Devices of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, China
| | - Yifan Lu
- Stomatology Hospital, School of Stomatology, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Zhejiang Provincial Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedical Research of Zhejiang Province, Cancer Center of Zhejiang University, Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Devices of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, China
| | - Qianming Chen
- Stomatology Hospital, School of Stomatology, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Zhejiang Provincial Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedical Research of Zhejiang Province, Cancer Center of Zhejiang University, Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Devices of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, China
| | - Misi Si
- Stomatology Hospital, School of Stomatology, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Zhejiang Provincial Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedical Research of Zhejiang Province, Cancer Center of Zhejiang University, Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Devices of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Romandini M, Bougas K, Alibegovic L, Hosseini S, Carcuac O, Berglundh T, Derks J. Long-term outcomes and prognostic factors of surgical treatment of peri-implantitis - A retrospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2024; 35:321-329. [PMID: 38112108 DOI: 10.1111/clr.14228] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/02/2023] [Revised: 11/27/2023] [Accepted: 12/08/2023] [Indexed: 12/20/2023]
Abstract
AIM To evaluate long-term outcomes and prognostic factors of non-reconstructive surgical treatment of peri-implantitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS One hundred forty-nine patients (267 implants) were surgically treated for peri-implantitis and followed for an average of 7.0 (SD: 3.6) years. The primary outcome was implant loss. Additional bone loss and surgical retreatment were secondary outcomes. Patient/implant characteristics, as well as clinical and radiographic parameters collected prior to initial surgery, were evaluated as potential predictors of implant loss. Flexible parametric survival models using restricted cubic spline functions were used; 5- and 10-year predicted rates of implant loss were calculated according to different scenarios. RESULTS Fifty-three implants (19.9%) in 35 patients (23.5%) were lost during the observation period. Implant loss occurred after a mean period of 4.4 (SD: 3.0) years and was predicted by implant surface characteristics (modified surface; HR 4.5), implant length (HR 0.8 by mm), suppuration at baseline (HR 2.7) and disease severity (baseline bone loss: HR 1.2 by mm). Estimates of 5- and 10-year implant loss ranged from 1% (best prognostic scenario; initial bone loss <40% of implant length, turned implant surface and absence of suppuration on probing (SoP)) to 63% (worst prognostic scenario; initial bone loss ≥60% of implant length, modified implant surface and SoP) and from 3% to 89%, respectively. Surgical retreatment was performed at 65 implants (24.3%) in 36 patients (24.2%) after a mean time period of 4.5 (3.1) years. In all, 59.5% of implants showed additional bone loss, were surgically retreated or lost. CONCLUSIONS Recurrence of disease is common following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis. The strongest predictor for implant loss was implant surface characteristics. Implant length as well as suppuration and disease severity at baseline were also relevant factors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mario Romandini
- Department of Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Kostas Bougas
- Department of Periodontology, Institute of Odontology, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
- Public Dental Service, Region Västra Götaland, Vanersborg, Sweden
| | - Lamija Alibegovic
- Department of Periodontology, Institute of Odontology, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
- Public Dental Service, Region Västra Götaland, Vanersborg, Sweden
| | - Sara Hosseini
- Public Dental Service, Region Västra Götaland, Vanersborg, Sweden
| | - Olivier Carcuac
- Department of Periodontology, Institute of Odontology, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Tord Berglundh
- Department of Periodontology, Institute of Odontology, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Jan Derks
- Department of Periodontology, Institute of Odontology, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
- Public Dental Service, Region Västra Götaland, Vanersborg, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Zhang Y, Wu J, Yang Q, Zhou Y, Wang M, Zhang Z, Zou D. Bone formation in large/moderate gap after immediate implantation in response to different treatments: a pre-clinical study in the canine posterior mandible. Clin Oral Investig 2024; 28:181. [PMID: 38424389 DOI: 10.1007/s00784-024-05559-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/07/2023] [Accepted: 02/13/2024] [Indexed: 03/02/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES This study aims to investigate different treatments on new bone formation around immediate implants in the canine posterior mandible with varying sized mesial-distal gap. MATERIALS AND METHODS The 4th premolar and the 1st molar of six Labrador dogs were extracted from the mandible, and 4 dental implants were placed 1 mm below the level of the buccal bone crest. Moderate/large mesial-distal gaps between the implants and the sockets were treated with one of four methods and divided into the following groups: (1) the blank group, (2) the collagen membrane (CM) group, (3) the deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) group, and (4) the DBBM + CM group. Sequential fluorescent labeling was performed at 4, 8, and 10 weeks after the operation. After 12 weeks, the dogs were euthanized, and specimens were collected for micro-CT scanning and histological analysis. RESULTS The survival rate of immediate implant was 100%. Micro-CT showed significant differences in bone mineral density (BMD) and bone volume fraction (BVF) among groups (P = 0.040, P = 0.009); other indicators were not significantly different among groups. Histological analysis showed the proportion of new bone formation and bone-to-implant contact were not significantly different among groups. No significant difference in bone reduction height around dental implant among four groups and varied mesial-distal gap size. CONCLUSION Owing to the restricted sample size, this pilot study lacks conclusive findings. Within the limitation, this study demonstrated that although DBBM significantly increase BMD and BVF, the use of DBBM/CM didn't significantly improve bone formation and healing in extraction sockets around the implants in both moderate and large mesial-distal gap. CLINICAL RELEVANCE The use of deproteinized bovine bone in conjunction with collagen is a common practice in immediate implantation procedures in the posterior mandible. However, there is a lack of conclusive evidence regarding the timing and circumstances under which they should be employed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yiwen Zhang
- Department of Oral Surgery, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, College of Stomatology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, 200001, China
- National Center for Stomatology, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Stomatology, Research Unit of Oral and Maxillofacial Regenerative Medicine, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Shanghai, 200001, China
| | - Jing Wu
- Department of Oral Surgery, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, College of Stomatology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, 200001, China
- National Center for Stomatology, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Stomatology, Research Unit of Oral and Maxillofacial Regenerative Medicine, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Shanghai, 200001, China
| | - Qiutong Yang
- Department of Oral Surgery, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, College of Stomatology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, 200001, China
- National Center for Stomatology, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Stomatology, Research Unit of Oral and Maxillofacial Regenerative Medicine, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Shanghai, 200001, China
| | - Yong Zhou
- Department of Oral Implant, Key Lab. of Oral Diseases Research of Anhui Province, Stomatologic Hospital & College, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, 230032, China
| | - Mohan Wang
- Department of Oral Implant, Key Lab. of Oral Diseases Research of Anhui Province, Stomatologic Hospital & College, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, 230032, China
| | - Zhiyuan Zhang
- Department of Oral Surgery, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, College of Stomatology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, 200001, China
- National Center for Stomatology, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Stomatology, Research Unit of Oral and Maxillofacial Regenerative Medicine, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Shanghai, 200001, China
| | - Duohong Zou
- Department of Oral Surgery, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, College of Stomatology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, 200001, China.
- National Center for Stomatology, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Stomatology, Research Unit of Oral and Maxillofacial Regenerative Medicine, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Shanghai, 200001, China.
- Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Collage of Stomatology, Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, 200011, China.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Ichioka Y, Virto L, Nuevo P, Gamonal JD, Derks J, Larsson L, Sanz M, Berglundh T. Decontamination of biofilm-contaminated implant surfaces: An in vitro evaluation. Clin Oral Implants Res 2023; 34:1058-1072. [PMID: 37469250 DOI: 10.1111/clr.14136] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2023] [Revised: 06/17/2023] [Accepted: 07/04/2023] [Indexed: 07/21/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The aim of the present study was to evaluate the cleaning efficacy of two mechanical and two chemical protocols in the decontamination of implant surfaces. METHODS In total, 123 commercially available implants were mounted in plastic models mimicking peri-implant circumferential intra-bony defects. A multispecies biofilm was grown on implant surfaces. Mechanical (air-polishing (AP), rotating titanium brush (TiB)) and chemical decontamination (alkaline electrolyzed water, N-acetyl-L-cysteine) protocols were used. Cleaning efficacy in terms of residual biofilm area, chemical surface properties, and bacterial counts were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy, energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy, and quantitative polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS Surface decontamination protocols including use of an AP device or a rotating TiB were superior in terms of biofilm removal and in reducing atomic% of Carbon on implant surfaces when compared to methods restricted to wiping with gauze. The use of chemical agents as adjuncts to the mechanical cleaning protocols provided no relevant overall benefit over saline. No treatment modality, however, resulted in complete biofilm removal. CONCLUSION Air-polishing and rotating TiB were more effective implant surface decontamination protocols than wiping with gauzes. Use of chemical agents did not improve cleaning efficacy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yuki Ichioka
- Department of Periodontology, Institute of Odontology, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Leire Virto
- ETEP (Etiology and Therapy of Periodontal and Peri-implant Diseases) Research Group, Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University, Madrid, Spain
- Department of Anatomy and Embryology, Faculty of Optics, Complutense University, Madrid, Spain
| | - Paula Nuevo
- Research Laboratory, Faculty of Odontology, Complutense University, Madrid, Spain
| | - Juan Daniel Gamonal
- ETEP (Etiology and Therapy of Periodontal and Peri-implant Diseases) Research Group, Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University, Madrid, Spain
| | - Jan Derks
- Department of Periodontology, Institute of Odontology, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Lena Larsson
- Department of Periodontology, Institute of Odontology, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Mariano Sanz
- ETEP (Etiology and Therapy of Periodontal and Peri-implant Diseases) Research Group, Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University, Madrid, Spain
| | - Tord Berglundh
- Department of Periodontology, Institute of Odontology, The Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Wilensky A, Shapira L, Limones A, Martin C. The efficacy of implant surface decontamination using chemicals during surgical treatment of peri-implantitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Periodontol 2023; 50 Suppl 26:336-358. [PMID: 36792071 DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.13794] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/07/2022] [Revised: 01/03/2023] [Accepted: 02/12/2023] [Indexed: 02/17/2023]
Abstract
AIM To answer the following PICOS question: "In adult patients with peri-implantitis, what is the efficacy of surgical therapy with chemical surface decontamination of implant surfaces in comparison with surgical therapy alone or surgery with placebo decontamination, on probing pocket depth (PD) reduction and bleeding on probing (BoP)/suppuration on probing (SoP), in randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs with at least 6 months of follow-up?" MATERIALS AND METHODS Six databases were searched from their inception up to 20 May 2022. Data on clinical outcome variables were pooled and analysed using mean differences (MDs), risk ratios (RRs), or risk differences (RDs) as appropriate, 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and prediction intervals (PIs) in the case of significant heterogeneity. Primary outcomes were determined as changes in PD and BoP/SoP. Secondary outcomes were radiographic marginal bone loss (MBL), implant loss, and disease resolution. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022325603. RESULTS Six RCTs-two with moderate, three with high, and one with low risk of bias (RoB)-were included. These studies test the adjunctive effect of photodynamic therapy (PDT), chlorhexidine (CHX), and administration of local antibiotics (LAbs) during surgery on the clinical outcome. In a single 12-month study, the adjunctive use of local antibiotics showed a clinically relevant reduction of PD [MD = 1.44; 95%CI (0.40 to -2.48)] and MBL [MD = 1.21; 95%CI (0.44-1.98); one trial, 32 participants]. PDT showed a small but significant reduction in BoP [MD = 7.41%; 95%CI (0.81-14.00); p = 0.028; two trials; 42 participants]. Treatment with CHX resulted in no significant changes in PD, BoP, or MBL compared to placebo (saline solution). None of the interventions affected disease resolution and implant loss. Certainty of the evidence was very low for all outcome measures assessed. CONCLUSIONS Within the limitations of this systematic review and the meta-analysis, adjunctive use of chemicals such as PDT, CHX, and LAbs for surface decontamination during surgery of peri-implantitis cannot be recommended as superior to standard debridement procedures (mechanical debridement with or without saline).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Asaf Wilensky
- Department of Periodontology, Hadassah Medical Center, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Lior Shapira
- Department of Periodontology, Hadassah Medical Center, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Alvaro Limones
- Department of Conservative and Prosthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of Madrid (UCM), Madrid, Spain
| | - Conchita Martin
- Department of Dental Clinical Specialties, Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of Madrid (UCM), Madrid, Spain
- BIOCRAN Research group, Complutense University of Madrid (UCM), Madrid, Spain
| |
Collapse
|