Immediate placement of an endosseous root-form implant in an HIV-positive patient: report of a case

Is HIV positive a risk factor or contraindication in dental implant therapy?

HIV pathogenesis affects TCD4+ lymphocytes, causing impairment of the immune system. Thus, the consequent immunological fragility of individuals with the disease and the absence of studies that serve as a guide for clinicians' decision-making make many healthcare professionals recognize it as a synonym of contraindication for oral rehabilitation treatments with dental implants.

Evaluation of Sociodemographic Factors and Prevalence of Oral Lesions in People Living with HIV from Cacoal, Rondônia, Amazon Region of Brazil

Background: It is necessary to evaluate and understand the prevalence and risk factors of oral lesions (OL) in people living with HIV (PLWH) who were never studied before. The present study aimed to describe the prevalence of OL and its correlation with CD4⁺ T lymphocytes counts and HIV plasma viral load in PLWH treated in Rondônia. Methods: A cross-sectional study was carried out at Cacoal city, Rondônia state, Northern Brazil. Sociodemographic, epidemiological, immunologic and virological information of 113 PLWH were collected from medical records and dental examination was conducted to diagnose and classify OL in PLWH. Statistical analysis was performed using relative frequency distribution, ANOVA, Kruskal–Wallis, T-student and Mann-Whitney tests. Results: The overall prevalence of oral lesions was 28.3% (32/113), with candidiasis (7/32; 21.8%) and aphthous ulcer (7/32; 21.8%) being the most prevalent. There was a predominance of females, most patients being married, with a low level of education, a family income of 1 to 3 minimum wages and a single partner. An association was observed between the presence of oral lesions and a high viral load, as well as a lower occurrence of oral lesions in individuals with a higher count of CD4⁺ T cells. Conclusions: This study reveals a low prevalence of OL among PLWH, as well as the absence of relationship between HIV viral load, CD4⁺ T cells count and OL high prevalence.

Dental implants in individuals living with HIV-1: Results from a prospective study in patients undergoing highly active antiretroviral therapy

OBJECTIVE

To assess survival and success rates of dental implants and the occurrence of peri-implant diseases (mucositis/peri-implantitis) in HIV-1-infected individuals.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this prospective study, 13 HIV-1-infected individuals undergoing highly active antiretroviral therapy (with undetectable plasma HIV RNA levels, and CD4+ T cells > 350/mm³ ) were followed after implant placement, as well as 13 non-HIV-1-infected matched controls. Patients enrolled in this study were followed up to 120 months (mean = 40.6 months; standard deviation = 22.2; range 18 -120 months). Twenty-five implants were placed in pristine healed sites for each group and bone augmentation procedures, when needed, were done only for contour augmentation. Patients were enrolled in a strict periodontal/peri-implant supportive therapy protocol with three recalls per year. The two groups were compared regarding subject-level characteristics (age, gender, smoking, diabetes) and implant-level characteristics (marginal bone level, peri-implant health status).

RESULTS

All the implants healed uneventfully and reached 100% survival rates (after at least 18 months) in both groups. There were no significant differences between groups for peri-implant diseases (mucositis/peri-implantitis) and for all subject-level co-variables (p > .05). Only the variables dental implant prosthesis type (DIPT) (p = .021, d = .86) and follow up (p = .011, d = .77) showed statistically significant differences between groups.

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest that well-controlled HIV-1-infected individuals are eligible to undergo implant therapy, achieving survival and success rates comparable to non-HIV-1-infected controls.

Does HIV infection affect the survival of dental implants? A systematic review and meta-analysis

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Immunosuppression and coinfections associated with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection pose a relative contraindication for dental implant therapy. However, although implants have been placed in patients with HIV with reasonable success, how HIV infection affects their survival is unclear.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis was to analyze the data on the survival of dental implants in patients with HIV.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A search for relevant articles published up to November 2019 was performed in PubMed/Medline and Cochrane databases, Clinicaltrials.gov, and Google Scholar. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were adopted for the conduct of the systematic review. The most pertinent data were extracted and pooled for qualitative and quantitative analyses with 95% confidence intervals. Heterogeneity was analyzed by using I-squared statistics.

RESULTS

A total of 8 studies involving 411 individuals with HIV and 1109 implants were included in the meta-analysis. The mean follow-up period was 2.8 years. A pooled estimate of 95% of implant survival rate with 95% confidence interval(92% to 96%) was noted. Heterogeneity across the 8 studies was found to be 41% with moderate true variability.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review demonstrated that HIV infection does not pose a serious threat to implant survival on short-term evaluation, but the evidence is of low quality.

Dental implants and bone augmentation in HIV-infected patients under HAART: Case report and review of the literature

The present study reviewed the literature regarding dental implants in HIV-infected patients and reports the long-term follow-up of three clinical cases of patients under HAART that received bone augmentation and dental implants. The first case presents a young patient with a large defect in the mandible, as a consequence of a longitudinal fracture, that was treated with guided bone regeneration (GBR) previously to implant placement. The second case reported is middle-aged man with a fractured upper lateral incisor treated with immediate placement and simultaneous GBR to repair the dehiscence due to the buccal bone resorption. The third case shows an elderly patient that underwent sinus lifting with the simultaneous placement of two implants. All cases were treated after patients were medically controlled and followed for at least 10 years. Controlled HIV-infected patients undergoing HAART may be candidates to implant rehabilitation, as long as their plasmatic HIV viral load and CD4+ T lymphocytes count are within the parameters that indicate immune stability. Long-term stability of soft and hard tissues can be obtained maintaining function and esthetics. However, stronger evidence, based on prospective, controlled clinical trials is needed to provide the dental and medical teams with conclusive data.

Dental implants in patients affected by systemic diseases

Several systemic diseases (and relative medications) have been reported to impair or in some cases complicate dental implant surgery. In broader terms, when dealing with patients suffering from systemic diseases, the monitoring of the medical condition and of the related post-operative complications is of great importance in order to avoid risks which could jeopardise the health of the patient. In this review, the available evidence on implant survival/success, as well as relevant surgical recommendations in patients affected by systemic diseases, are evaluated and when possible, practical suggestions for the clinician are provided.

Long-term outcomes of oral rehabilitation with dental implants in HIV-positive patients: A retrospective case series

Background

The existing information on oral rehabilitations with dental implants in VIH-positive patients is scarce and of poor quality. Moreover, no long-term follow-up studies are available. Hence, the aims of this study were to describe the long-term survival and success rates of dental implants in a group of HIV-positive patients and to identify the most common postoperative complications, including peri-implant diseases.

Material and Methods

A retrospective case series of HIV-positive subjects treated with dental implants at the School of Dentistry of the University of Barcelona (Spain) was studied. Several clinical parameters were registered, including CD4 cell count, viral load and surgical complications. Additionally, the patients were assessed for implant survival and success rates and for the prevalence of peri-implant diseases. A descriptive statistical analysis of the data was performed.

Results

Nine participants (57 implants) were included. The patients’ median age was 42 years (IQR=13.5 years). The implant survival and success rates were 98.3% and 68.4%, respectively, with a mean follow-up of 77.5 months (SD=16.1 months). The patient-based prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis were 22.2% and 44.4% respectively at the last appointment. Patients that attended regular periodontal maintenance visits had significantly less mean bone loss than non-compliant patients (1.3 mm and 3.9 mm respectively).

Conclusions

Oral rehabilitation with dental implants in HIV-positive patients seems to provide satisfactory results. In order to reduce the considerably high prevalence of peri-implant diseases, strict maintenance programmes must be implemented.

Key words:HIV infection, dental implants, oral implantology, complications, peri-implantitis, peri-implant diseases.

Does HIV infection have an impact upon dental implant osseointegration? A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

A systematic review is made to determine whether human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection has an impact upon dental implant osseointegration.

STUDY DESIGN

A PubMed (MEDLINE) literature search was made of articles published up until 14 April 2014. The systematic review was conducted based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA). The quality of the studies included in the review was assessed using the Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies (MINORS) and levels of evidence (based on the University of Oxford's Center for Evidence Based Medicine criteria).

RESULTS

The combinations of search terms resulted in a list of 132 titles. Nine studies finally met the inclusion criteria and were selected for inclusion in the systematic review. A total of 173 dental implants were placed in 80 patients (135 implants in 56 HIV-positive subjects and 38 implants in 24 HIV-negative patients), and a single loss of dental implant osseointegration was recorded in an HIV-positive patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that dental implant placement in HIV-positive patients does not increase the dental implant failure rate. Prophylactic antibiotic treatment, the administration of highly active antiretroviral therapy, and control of the CD4+ T lymphocyte counts appear to be the main influencing factors in this respect. Given the few studies included in our systematic review, further prospective studies involving larger sample sizes and longer durations of follow-up are required in order to confirm the results obtained.

Surgical crown lengthening in a population with human immunodeficiency virus: a retrospective analysis)

BACKGROUND

Individuals with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) have an increased risk of developing health problems, including some that are life threatening. Today, dental treatment for the population with a positive HIV diagnosis (HIV+) is comprehensive. There are limited reports on the outcomes of intraoral surgical therapy in patients with HIV, such as crown lengthening surgery (CLS) with osseous recontouring. This report investigates the outcome of CLS procedures performed at an urban dental school in a population of individuals with HIV. Specifically, this retrospective clinical analysis evaluates the healing response after CLS.

METHODS

Paper and electronic records were examined from the year 2000 to the present. Twenty-one individuals with HIV and immunosuppression, ranging from insignificant to severe, underwent CLS. Pertinent details, including laboratory values, medications, smoking history/status, and postoperative outcomes, were recorded. One such surgery is described in detail with radiographs, photographs, and a videoclip.

RESULTS

Of the 21 patients with HIV examined after CLS, none had postoperative complications, such as delayed healing, infection, or prolonged bleeding. Variations in viral load (<48 to 40,000 copies/mL), CD4 cell count (126 to 1,260 cells/mm(3)), smoking (6 of 21 patients), platelets (130,000 to 369,000 cells/mm(3)), and neutrophils (1.1 to 4.5 × 103 /mm(3)) did not impact surgical healing. In addition, variations in medication regimens (highly active anti-retroviral therapy [18]; on protease inhibitors [1]; no medications [2]) did not have an impact.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this retrospective analysis show the absence of postoperative complications after CLS in this population with HIV. Additional investigation into this area will help health care practitioners increase the range of surgical services provided to this group of patients.

Root coverage in an HIV-positive individual: combined use of a lateral sliding flap and resin-modified glass ionomer for the management of an isolated severe recession defect

BACKGROUND

Gingival recession is a frequent clinical finding in the general population. Exposed root surfaces are more likely to develop root sensitivity and root caries and pose esthetic concerns for the patient. Most root coverage procedures have been described on non-restored root surfaces. Limited data are available that describe root coverage procedures on restored root surfaces. To our knowledge, this is the first case report in which a severe recession defect and its associated carious lesion were managed using the combination of a lateral sliding flap and a resin-modified glass ionomer restoration in an HIV-positive individual.

METHODS

A 53-year-old male patient with a 25-year history of HIV infection presented for comprehensive care. The facial surface of tooth #22 had a fractured composite restoration, recurrent decay, and a Miller Class III recession defect. The lesion was restored with resin-modified glass ionomer and root coverage was obtained by a lateral sliding flap mobilized from the adjacent edentulous ridge. After 8 weeks, surgical access was used to correct a previously undetected void in the restoration.

RESULTS

Uneventful healing was observed at the 1-, 4-, 8-, 10-, 12-, and 24-week postoperative visits. Root coverage of 5 mm along with a 2-mm band of keratinized tissue was obtained at 24 weeks. The gingiva displayed no signs of inflammation and was tightly adapted to the root surface with minimal probing depths circumferentially.

CONCLUSION

Successful root coverage was obtained on a resin-modified glass ionomer-restored surface in an HIV-positive individual.

Medical Contraindications to Implant Therapy: Part II: Relative Contraindications

Systemic conditions and habits influence dental implant survival to varying degrees. Illnesses that impair the normal healing cascade worsen surgical success. The mere presence of a disease, however, does not necessarily preclude implant therapy or affect significantly long-term outcomes. Certain disorders, when controlled, or other situations allow implant survival rates that match those in health. This paper reviews these relative contraindications, which include adolescence, aging, osteoporosis, smoking, diabetes, positive interleukin-1 genotype, human immunodeficiency virus positivity, cardiovascular disease, and hypothyroidism.

Systemic diseases affecting osseointegration therapy

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the impact of systemic diseases and their treatment on the success of osseointegration therapy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A search was made to find human studies including subjects treated with osseointegrated oral implants, with a diagnosis of 11 systemic diseases, and reporting at least implant survival.

RESULTS

For most conditions, no studies comparing patients with and without the condition in a controlled setting were found. The evidence to recommend implant therapy was low and consisted in presentations of some successfully treated cases. With regard to diabetes, three types of reports were found: eight case series of diabetic patients treated with implants, six cross-sectional, longitudinal or retrospective evaluations of groups of subjects treated with implants, including some diabetic patients, and one matched control retrospective chart survey. The heterogeneity of the material and the method of data reporting precluded a formal meta-analysis. No unequivocal tendency for subjects with diabetes to have higher failure rates emerged, but the largest of these studies indicated a significant increase in the relative risk of implant failure with diabetes. The data obtained from 17 papers reporting data from osteoporotic patients were also heterogeneous. The evidence for an association of osteoporosis and implant failure was low.

CONCLUSIONS

The level of evidence indicative of absolute and relative contraindications for implant therapy due to systemic diseases is low. Many conditions have been listed as potentially critical, but studies comparing patients with and without the condition in a controlled setting are sparse.

A review of selected dental literature on evidence-based treatment planning for dental implants: Report of the Committee on Research in Fixed Prosthodontics of the Academy of Fixed Prosthodontics

This literature review summarizes research with the aim of providing dentists with evidence-based guidelines to apply when planning treatment with osseointegrated implants. Peer-reviewed literature published in the English language between 1969 and 2003 was reviewed using Medline and hand searches. Topics reviewed include systemic host factors such as age, gender, various medical conditions, and patient habits, local host factors involving the quantity and quality of bone and soft tissue, presence of present or past infection and occlusion, prosthetic design factors, including the number and arrangement of implants, size and coatings of implants, cantilevers and connections to natural teeth, and methods to improve outcomes of implant treatment in each category. The review demonstrated that there is no systemic factor or habit that is an absolute contraindication to the placement of osseointegrated implants in the adult patient, although cessation of smoking can improve outcome significantly. The most important local patient factor for successful treatment is the quality and quantity of bone available at the implant site. Specific design criteria are provided, including guidelines for spacing of implants, size, materials, occlusion, and fit. Limitations in the current body of knowledge are identified, and directions for future research are suggested.

Fixed partial denture or single-tooth implant restoration? Statistical considerations for sequencing and treatment

The choice to replace a single missing tooth can be based on the primary decision that the restorability of the tooth is in doubt. Many teeth are decimated by incipient or recurrent caries, trauma, endodontic complications, or periodontal disease which requires extraction. It is our objective to familiarize the participant with literature comparing success rates of fixed partial dentures and single-tooth implant restorations and a repertoire of prosthodontic techniques used in replacement of single missing teeth with osseointegrated dental implants. The fixed partial denture (FPD) has been regarded as the standard of care for some time in replacement of single and multiple missing teeth. Many studies surveying long term survival have been compiled and analyzed to arrive at a generalized outcome. Most of these studies arrive at common conclusions. Studies surveying success of single-tooth implant-supported restorations are not comparably abundant nor survey for comparable time as those for FPDs. Although, many of the outcomes are statistical survival estimates such as Kaplan-Meier survival tables, implant restorations in partially dentate patients are a predictable means of tooth replacement. There are certain factors which make FPD more appropriate and conversely factors which make an implant restoration more appropriate. Indications and contraindications for each treatment scenario will also be reviewed based on the literature and clinical experience. It is hoped that the practitioner will be able to appropriately identify those cases in which either an FPD or an implant restoration is the appropriate treatment option.

Periodontal host modulation with antiproteinase, anti-inflammatory, and bone-sparing agents. A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The use of modulating agents, including inhibition of matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) with antiproteinases, blocking production of proinflammatory cytokines and prostaglandins with anti-inflammatory drugs, and inhibiting activation of osteoclasts with bone-sparing agents, has been postulated to be of therapeutic value as an adjunctive therapy to the management of chronic periodontitis.

RATIONALE

The objective of this systematic review of the literature was to assess the adjunctive efficacy of antiproteinase, anti-inflammatory, and bone-sparing host-modulating agents in the treatment of gingivitis, aggressive periodontitis, and chronic periodontitis. FOCUSED QUESTIONS: 1. In patients with periodontal diseases, what is the effect of host-modulation agents, alone or combined with conventional therapy, compared to conventional therapy alone as assessed by clinical, radiographic, adverse, and patient-centered outcomes? 2. In patients with dental implants, what is the effect of host-modulation agents on implant success assessed by clinical, radiographic, adverse, and patient-centered outcomes?

SEARCH PROTOCOL

MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched without language restrictions through April 1, 2002 for studies that used tetracycline (TET)-related matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) inhibitors, or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and bisphosphonate anti-osteolytic agents. The investigation also included hand searching of journals and contacting authors and industry experts.

SELECTION CRITERIA

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Only human studies (randomized controlled clinical trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, cross-sectional studies, and case series) were selected. Studies were on subjects with gingivitis, aggressive or chronic periodontitis, or dental implants. Interventions included TET-related MMP inhibitors, NSAIDs, or bisphosphonate anti-osteolytic agents.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

Studies that used MMP tissue inhibitors as diagnostic or prognostic indicators of periodontal disease or that evaluated short-term systemic antibodies or locally delivered levels of drugs with antiproteinase activity were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The primary outcomes for assessment were changes in bone or clinical attachment levels (CAL); secondary outcomes included clinical measures of plaque, gingival inflammation, probing depth (PD), and mobility. Summary data appropriate for meta-analysis were pooled using a weighted average and analyzed using a standardized difference; the results were checked with both fixed-effects and random-effects models.

MAIN RESULTS

1. A meta-analysis done on the studies reporting changes in CAL and PD following administration of sub-antimicrobial doses of doxycycline (SDD) in conjunction with scaling and root planing (SRP) in patients with periodontitis showed a statistically significant beneficial adjunctive effect. 2. There were insufficient data to provide meta-analyses on periodontal patients treated with other host-modulating agents; descriptive tables are included. 3. NSAIDS show promise in their ability to slow periodontal disease. 4. Preliminary data on bisphosphonate agents indicate there is a potential role for these agents in periodontitis management. 5. There are a very limited number of studies on host-modulating agents and dental implants and no analyses were possible. 6. Because the treatment methodologies and clinical variables differed considerably among the studies, it is difficult to summarize the information and identify a reliable total patient population.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

1. Large multi-center trials are needed to evaluate the role of host-modulating agents in the treatment of periodontitis. 2. NSAIDS and bisphosphonate drugs may have a potential adjunctive role in periodontal therapy. 3. The adjunctive use of SDD with SRP is statistically more effective than SRP alone in reducing PD and in achieving CAL gain.

Clinical complications with implants and implant prostheses

The purpose of this article is to identify the types of complications that have been reported in conjunction with endosseous root form implants and associated implant prostheses. A Medline and an extensive hand search were performed on English-language publications beginning in 1981. The searches focused on publications that contained clinical data regarding success/failure/complications. The complications were divided into the following 6 categories: surgical, implant loss, bone loss, peri-implant soft tissue, mechanical, and esthetic/phonetic. The raw data were combined from multiple studies and means calculated to identify trends noted in the incidences of complications. The most common implant complications (those with a greater than a 15% incidence) were loosening of the overdenture retentive mechanism (33%), implant loss in irradiated maxillae (25%), hemorrhage-related complications (24%), resin veneer fracture with fixed partial dentures (22%), implant loss with maxillary overdentures (21%), overdentures needing to be relined (19%), implant loss in type IV bone (16%), and overdenture clip/attachment fracture (16%). It was not possible to calculate an overall complications incidence for implant prostheses because there were not multiple clinical studies that simultaneously evaluated all or most of the categories of complications. Although the implant data had to be obtained from different studies, they do indicate a trend toward a greater incidence of complications with implant prostheses than single crowns, fixed partial dentures, all-ceramic crowns, resin-bonded prostheses, and posts and cores.