An 11-Year Retrospective Research Study of the Predictive Factors of Peri-Implantitis and Implant Failure: Analytic-Multicentric Study of 1279 Implants in Peru

Influence of crestal and sub-crestal implant position on development of peri-implant diseases: a 5-year retrospective analysis

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the influence of crestal and subcrestal implant position on development of peri-implant diseases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was designed as a retrospective clinical and radiographic analysis. Implant-supported fixed dental prostheses were allocated in two groups: with the shoulder (i) placed in sub-crestal level and (ii) placed at bone level. For each patient, the following clinical variables were assessed: FMPS, FMBS, PlI, BOP, and PD. After prothesis delivery, an intraoral radiograph was obtained; this exam was performed also at 5 years of observation period.

RESULTS

No statistically significant difference was found in terms of FMPS and FMBS at baseline and after 5 years follow-up (P < 0.05). A statistically significant difference was assessed between PD of control group and test group (P = 0.042). Patient-based analysis showed a 25.6% of peri-implant mucositis and 32.6% of peri-implantitis for implants placed with the shoulder in crestal position, while for implants inserted in sub-crestal position the percentage of peri-implant-mucositis and peri-implantitis were 19%; no statistically significant difference was found between groups after 5 years (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitation of the present study, the clinical and radiographic outcomes showed that the percentage of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis was not statistically significant for both groups after 5 years follow-up.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The outcomes of present study clinically demonstrated that a deep position of implant shoulder did not provide any benefits. On the contrary, it may be considered a possible risk indicator for implant diseases.

A cross-sectional study for prevalence and risk factors of peri-implant marginal bone loss

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Progressive peri-implant marginal bone loss and peri-implantitis have become a growing problem, but cross-sectional studies on their prevalence and risk factors are sparse.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this cross-sectional clinical study was to investigate the prevalence of peri-implant marginal bone loss (MBL) and to identify systemic and local risk factors.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

All adult patients who had received dental implants at the National Taiwan University Hospital (NTUH) during 2009 or 2010 were included. Their medical records were collected from the NTUH-integrative Medical Database. Consecutive follow-up radiographs were accessed for severity of MBL. The influence of each factor on MBL was estimated by using generalized estimating equations (GEEs).

RESULTS

A total of 732 participants with 1873 implants were analyzed (mean follow-up: 5.30 years). The prevalence of MBL was 59.15% at the individual level and 49.55% at the implant level. The risk indicators identified for the presence of MBL were follow-up period of more than 2 years, diagnosis of diabetes within 12 months, radiation therapy (2 years after implant placement), implant location at maxillary canine (compared with mandibular molar), and implants from the Nobel Biocare brands (Brånemark System and NobelActive). A second multivariate GEE model confirmed the association of progressive MBL with implant location at the maxillary canine and mandibular incisor and implant brand or design.

CONCLUSIONS

The identified risk indicators for MBL were longer follow-up period, diagnosis of diabetes, radiation therapy, implant location at maxillary canine, and implant brand or design.

Avoiding implant-related complications in medically compromised patients with or without unhealthy lifestyle/Elevated oxidative stress

Increased human life expectancy broadens the alternatives for missing teeth and played a role in the widespread use of dental implants and related augmentation procedures for the aging population. Though, many of these patients may have one or more diseases. These systemic conditions may directly lead to surgical complications, compromise implant/bone healing, or influence long-term peri-implant health and its response to biologic nuisances. Offering patients credible expectations regarding intra- and postoperative complications and therapeutic prognosis is an ethical and legal obligation. Clear identification of potential types of adverse effects, complications, or errors is important for decision-making processes as they may be related to different local, systemic, and technical aspects. Therefore, the present review structures the underlying biological mechanisms, clinical evidence, and clinical recommendations for the most common systemic risk factors for implant-related complications.

A Study of 42 Partially Edentulous Patients with Single-Crown Restorations and Implants to Compare Bone Loss Between Crestal and Subcrestal Endosseous Implant Placement

BACKGROUND The purpose of the study was to evaluate the influence of dental implant placement at different bone levels upon the resultant postoperative peri-implant bone loss. MATERIAL AND METHODS Forty-two partially edentulous patients seeking implant-supported single-crown restorations were screened followed by segregation into 2 groups (GP), GP E (equicrestal) and GP S (subcrestal) (n=21 each). Sixty endosseous implants (30 each) (Adin Tourage-S, Israel), size 3.5/8 and 4/10 mm for mandibles, were placed using a 2-stage surgical procedure. At 4 to 6 months, straight abutments were attached followed by restoration (Vita Zahnfabrik, Germany). Crestal bone levels (mesial/distal) of implant fixtures were assessed at 5 time intervals (after surgery, and at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months) using digital radiography. Means and standard deviations were calculated, following which the differences were statistically analyzed using ANOVA at P value of <0.05. RESULTS The mean annual bone loss for GP S (1.96 mm) was higher than GP E (1.10 mm). At all studied time intervals, the bone loss for implants in GP S was higher than in GP E (P<0.05). Between time intervals, lowest bone loss was observed on the distal side in GP E (0.11 mm/6-9 month) and the highest bone loss was observed on the distal side of GP S (0.6 mm/9-12 month). Differences in the means between the 2 groups on mesial and distal sides were statistically significant at all time intervals (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS Subcrestal implant placement was associated with more bone loss than when implants are placed at the crestal level.

MiR-152-5p suppresses osteogenic differentiation of mandible mesenchymal stem cells by regulating ATG14-mediated autophagy

BACKGROUND

Osteoporosis affects the mandible resulting in bone loss. Though impairments are not life threatening, they affect a person's quality-of-life particularly vulnerable elderly. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are novel regulatory factors that play an important role in regulating bone metabolism. Autophagy is evolutionarily conserved intracellular self-degradation process and is vital in the maintenance of both miRNA and bone homeostasis. However, the role of autophagy in the pathogenesis of miRNA regulating osteoporosis remains unclear.

METHODS

In the study, we established a rat osteoporosis model induced by ovariectomy (OVX) and isolated mesenchymal stem cells from mandible (MMSCs-M). Several miRNAs were identified to regulate osteoporosis in some studies. qRT-PCR was applied to examine the expression of miRNA, autophagy and osteogenic differentiation-related genes. Western blotting assays were performed to detect the expression of autophagy and osteogenic differentiation proteins. Immunofluorescence and transmission electron microscope were used to verify the autophagy activity. Transfecting technology was used to enhance or suppress the expression of miR-152-5p which enable us to observe the relationship between miR-152-5p, autophagy and osteogenic differentiation. Additionally, the measurement of reactive oxygen species was used to investigate the mechanism of autophagy affecting osteogenic differentiation.

RESULTS

We found an upregulated expression of miR-152-5p in MMSCs-M in OVX group. Downregulated autophagy-related gene, proteins and autophagosome were detected in vitro of OVX group compared with sham group. Moreover, downregulation of miR-152-5p promoted osteogenic differentiation of MMSCs-M as well as enhanced autophagy-related proteins in OVX group. Conversely, overexpression of miR-152-5p showed opposite effect in sham group. Meanwhile, we found Atg14 (autophagy-related protein homolog 14) was identified to be a direct target of miR-152-5p theoretically and functionally. In other words, we confirmed inhibition of miR-152-5p promoted the osteogenic differentiation via promoting ATG14-mediated autophagy. Furthermore, miR-152-5p/ATG14-mediated autophagy regulated osteogenic differentiation by reducing the endogenous ROS accumulation and maintaining cellular redox homeostasis.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that miR-152-5p is the first identified to regulate osteogenic differentiation by directly targeting autophagy-related protein ATG14 and regulating oxidative stress and therapeutic inhibition of miR-152-5p may be an efficient anabolic strategy for osteoporosis.

Binary Response Analysis Using Logistic Regression in Dentistry

Multivariate analysis with binary response is extensively utilized in dental research due to variations in dichotomous outcomes. One of the analyses for binary response variable is binary logistic regression, which explores the associated factors and predicts the response probability of the binary variable. This article aims to explain the statistical concepts of binary logistic regression analysis applicable to the field of dental research, including model fitting, goodness of fit test, and model validation. Moreover, interpretation of the model and logistic regression are also discussed with relevant examples. Practical guidance is also provided for dentists and dental researchers to enhance their basic understanding of binary logistic regression analysis.

Systematic review on diabetes mellitus and dental implants: an update

Purpose

Dental implant surgery was developed to be the most suitable and comfortable instrument for dental and oral rehabilitation in the past decades, but with increasing numbers of inserted implants, complications are becoming more common. Diabetes mellitus as well as prediabetic conditions represent a common and increasing health problem (International Diabetes Federation in IDF Diabetes Atlas, International Diabetes Federation, Brussels, 2019) with extensive harmful effects on the entire organism [(Abiko and Selimovic in Bosnian J Basic Med Sci 10:186–191, 2010), (Khader et al., in J Diabetes Complicat 20:59–68, 2006, 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2005.05.006)]. Hence, this study aimed to give an update on current literature on effects of prediabetes and diabetes mellitus on dental implant success.

Methods

A systematic literature research based on the PRISMA statement was conducted to answer the PICO question “Do diabetic patients with dental implants have a higher complication rate in comparison to healthy controls?”. We included 40 clinical studies and 16 publications of aggregated literature in this systematic review.

Results

We conclude that patients with poorly controlled diabetes mellitus suffer more often from peri-implantitis, especially in the post-implantation time. Moreover, these patients show higher implant loss rates than healthy individuals in long term. Whereas, under controlled conditions success rates are similar. Perioperative anti-infective therapy, such as the supportive administration of antibiotics and chlorhexidine, is the standard nowadays as it seems to improve implant success. Only few studies regarding dental implants in patients with prediabetic conditions are available, indicating a possible negative effect on developing peri-implant diseases but no influence on implant survival.

Conclusion

Dental implant procedures represent a safe way of oral rehabilitation in patients with prediabetes or diabetes mellitus, as long as appropriate precautions can be adhered to. Accordingly, under controlled conditions there is still no contraindication for dental implant surgery in patients with diabetes mellitus or prediabetic conditions.

The risk factors of early implant failure: A retrospective study of 6113 implants

BACKGROUND

The risk factors of early implant failure were controversial among previous studies, especially for implants in different sites.

PURPOSE

To analyze the rate and risk factors of early implant failure occurring before the placement of final prosthesis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted based on electrical medical records of patients who received dental implant placement from 2015 to 2019. Generalized estimation equation analyses were used to explore potential risk factors influencing early implant failure.

RESULTS

Overall, 6113 implants in 3785 patients were included. The rate of early implant failure was 1.6% at patient level and 1.2% at implant level. The early implant failure was significantly associated with implants in the posterior maxilla, with specific surface modifications and in previously augmented sites (p < 0.05). Risk factors for maxillary implants included surface modification and bone augmentation procedures (p < 0.01), whereas risk factors for mandibular implants included gender and bone augmentation procedures (p < 0.05). For implants placed in previously augmented sites, implants placed in the anterior mandible had a higher risk of early failure (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The risk factors for early implant failures varied among different sites; hence, they should be comprehensively considered in presurgical treatment plan.

Survival rate and potential risk indicators of implant loss in non-smokers and systemically healthy periodontitis patients: An up to 9-year retrospective study

BACKGROUND

An increasing number of patients with chronic periodontitis (CP) have received implant restoration. However, very few studies have evaluated the probable risk indicators of implant loss in patients with CP.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to evaluate implant long-term survival rates in patients with CP. The results are analyzed to discern potential risk indicators of implant loss.

METHODS

A total of 1549 implants were inserted in 827 non-smokers and systemically healthy CP patients between March 2011 and March 2019. Clinical variables (age; sex; implant location; implant diameter; implant length; implant type; bone quality; bone graft, periodontal disease status, and insertion torque) were recorded. Kaplan-Meier survival curves illustrated the cumulative survival rate. The relationship between variables and implant loss was discerned by univariate analysis. Further multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was carried out for the variables with P < 0.2.

RESULTS

The cumulative survival rates were 98.8% after 3 months, 97.9% after 6 months, 97.7% after 1 year, and 97.4% after 2 to 9 years. After adjusting possible confounders, the multivariable Cox regression model revealed statistically significant influences of implant location, history of bone graft, and insertion torque on implant loss. Implants with history of bone graft were more likely to loss. Implants inserted in the anterior area had a higher implant loss risk; insertion torque of <15 Newton-centimeter (Ncm) showed a relatively high risk of being lost.

CONCLUSIONS

The study represented public hospital insight into long-term implant results of patients with CP. Under the premise of strict periodontal control, patients with the history of CP exhibited relatively high implant survival rate. Anterior implant location, history of bone graft, and insertion torque <15 Ncm are associated with a lower implant survival rate and could be considered at a higher risk of implant failure in patients with CP.

Hyperlipidemia Impairs Osseointegration via the ROS/Wnt/β-Catenin Pathway

The influence of hyperlipidemia on titanium implant osseointegration and the underlying mechanisms is not well understood. This study investigates the changes in osseointegration and explores the potential mechanisms in hyperlipidemia conditions. In vivo, specialized titanium implants were implanted in the femurs of diet-induced or genetic hyperlipidemia mice. In vitro, primary murine osteoblasts were cultured on the titanium surface in high-fat medium. Results showed that hyperlipidemia led to poor osseointegration in both types of mice in vivo, and high-fat medium impaired the osteogenic differentiation of primary osteoblasts on the titanium surface in vitro. In addition, high-fat medium caused significant overproduction of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and inhibition of the Wnt/β-catenin pathway in osteoblasts. Both N-acetyl-L-cysteine (NAC, an ROS antagonist) and Wnt3a (an activator of the Wnt/β-catenin pathway) attenuated the poor osteogenic ability of osteoblasts. In addition, NAC reactivated the Wnt/β-catenin pathway in osteoblasts under high-fat stimulation. These results demonstrate that hyperlipidemia impairs osseointegration via the ROS/Wnt/β-catenin pathway and provide support for the ROS or Wnt/β-catenin pathway as a promising therapeutic target for the development of novel drugs or implant materials to improve the osseointegration of implants in hyperlipidemic patients.

Implant survival and risk factor analysis in regenerated bone: results from a 5-year retrospective study

Purpose

The aims of this study were to evaluate the 5-year cumulative survival rate (CSR) of implants placed with guided bone regeneration (GBR) compared to implants placed in native bone, and to identify factors contributing to implant failure in regenerated bone.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included 240 patients who had implant placement either with a GBR procedure (regenerated bone group) or with pristine bone (native bone group). Data on demographic features (age, sex, smoking, and medical history), location of the implant, implant-specific features, and grafting procedures and materials were collected. The 5-year CSRs in both groups were estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Risk factors for implant failure were analyzed with a Cox proportional hazards model.

Results

In total, 264 implants in the native bone group and 133 implants in the regenerated bone group were analyzed. The 5-year CSRs were 96.4% in the regenerated bone group and 97.5% in the native bone group, which was not a significant difference. The multivariable analysis confirmed that bone status was not an independent risk factor for implant failure. However, smoking significantly increased the failure rate (hazard ratio, 10.7; P=0.002).

Conclusions

The 5-year CSR of implants placed in regenerated bone using GBR was comparable to that of implants placed in native bone. Smoking significantly increased the risk of implant failure in both groups.