Surface Topography Has Less Influence on Peri-Implantitis than Patient Factors: A Comparative Clinical Study of Two Dental Implant Systems

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to assess the risk of peri-implantitis (PI) onset among different implant systems and evaluate the severity of the disease from a population of patients treated in a university clinic. Furthermore, this study intends to thoroughly examine the surface properties of the implant systems that have been identified and investigated.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Data from a total of six hundred and 14 patients were extracted from the Institute of Clinical Dentistry, Dental Faculty, University of Oslo. Subject- and implant-based variables were collected, including the type of implant, date of implant installation, medical records, recall appointments up to 2022, periodontal measurements, information on diabetes, smoking status, sex, and age. The outcome of interest was the diagnosis of PI, defined as the occurrence of bleeding on probing (BoP), peri-implant probing depth (PD) ≥ 5 mm, and bone loss (BL). Data were analyzed using multivariate linear and logistic regression. Scanning electron microscopy, light laser profilometer, and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy were utilized for surface and chemical analyses.

RESULTS

Among the patients evaluated, 6.8% were diagnosed with PI. A comparison was made between two different implant systems: Dentsply Sirona, OsseospeedTM and Straumann SLActive, with mean follow-up times of 3.84 years (SE: 0.15) and 3.34 years (SE: 0.15), respectively. The surfaces have different topographies and surface chemistry. However, no significant association was found between PI and implant surface/system, including no difference in the onset or severity of the disease. Nonetheless, plaque control was associated with an increased risk of developing PI, along with the gender of the patient. Furthermore, patients suffering from PI exhibited increased BL in the anterior region.

CONCLUSION

No differences were observed among the evaluated implant systems, although the surfaces have different topography and chemistry. Factors that affected the risk of developing PI were plaque index and male gender. The severity of BL in patients with PI was more pronounced in the anterior region. Consequently, our findings show that success in implantology is less contingent on selecting implant systems and more on a better understanding of patient-specific risk factors, as well as on implementing biomaterials that can more effectively debride dental implants.

Biofouling on titanium implants: a novel formulation of poloxamer and peroxide for in situ removal of pellicle and multi-species oral biofilm

Eradicating biofouling from implant surfaces is essential in treating peri-implant infections, as it directly addresses the microbial source for infection and inflammation around dental implants. This controlled laboratory study examines the effectiveness of the four commercially available debridement solutions '(EDTA (Prefgel®), NaOCl (Perisolv®), H2O2 (Sigma-Aldrich) and Chlorhexidine (GUM® Paroex®))' in removing the acquired pellicle, preventing pellicle re-formation and removing of a multi-species oral biofilm growing on a titanium implant surface, and compare the results with the effect of a novel formulation of a peroxide-activated 'Poloxamer gel (Nubone® Clean)'. Evaluation of pellicle removal and re-formation was conducted using scanning electron microscope (SEM), energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy to assess the surface morphology, elemental composition and chemical surface composition. Hydrophilicity was assessed through contact angle measurements. The multi-species biofilm model included Streptococcus oralis, Fusobacterium nucleatum and Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans, reflecting the natural oral microbiome's complexity. Biofilm biomass was quantified using safranin staining, biofilm viability was evaluated using confocal laser scanning microscopy, and SEM was used for morphological analyses of the biofilm. Results indicated that while no single agent completely eradicated the biofilm, the 'Poloxamer gel' activated with 'H2O2' exhibited promising results. It minimized re-contamination of the pellicle by significantly lowering the contact angle, indicating enhanced hydrophilicity. This combination also showed a notable reduction in carbon contaminants, suggesting the effective removal of organic residues from the titanium surface, in addition to effectively reducing viable bacterial counts. In conclusion, the 'Poloxamer gel + H2O2' combination emerged as a promising chemical decontamination strategy for peri-implant diseases. It underlines the importance of tailoring treatment methods to the unique microbial challenges in peri-implant diseases and the necessity of combining chemical decontaminating strategies with established mechanical cleaning procedures for optimal management of peri-implant diseases.

A Comparative Investigation of Chemical Decontamination Methods for In-Situ Cleaning of Dental Implant Surfaces

Surface chemistry evaluation is crucial in assessing the efficacy of chemical decontamination products for titanium implants. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of chemical decontamination solutions in cleaning a contaminated dental implant surface and to evaluate the potential of combining Pluronic gel with hydrogen peroxide (NuBone®Clean) by evaluating pellicle disruption and re-formation on implant surfaces. In addition, ensuring safety with in vitro and human testing protocols. X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy (XPS) was utilised for surface analysis. All the tested gels had some effect on the surface cleanness except for PrefGel®. Among the tested chemical decontamination candidates, NuBone®Clean demonstrated effectiveness in providing a cleaner titanium surface. Furthermore, none of the tested chemical agents exhibited cytotoxic effects, and the safety assessment showed no adverse events. The results of this study highlight the significance of conducting comprehensive evaluations, encompassing safety and efficacy, before introducing new chemical agents for dental treatments. The findings suggest that NuBone®Clean shows potential as a chemical decontamination solution for implant surfaces. However, further investigation through randomised clinical trials is necessary. By adhering to rigorous testing protocols, the development of safe and efficient chemical decontamination strategies can be advanced, benefiting patients and promoting progress in implant dentistry.

The Antibacterial and Cytotoxic Effects of Silver Nanoparticles Coated Titanium Implants: A Narrative Review

Nanotechnology has become an emerging research field with numerous biomedical scientific applications. Silver possesses bactericidal activities that have been harnessed for centuries; however, there is a concern about the toxic effects of silver nanoparticles. This paper aims to provide an overview of silver-treated dental implants and discuss their potential to reduce the prevalence of peri-implant diseases. An electronic search was performed using PubMed. After screening, data extraction was performed on the 45 remaining articles using inclusion and exclusion criteria. Most of the articles demonstrated that silver nanoparticles embedded in a coating layer and/or on surface-treated titanium exhibit sound antibacterial effects and biocompatibility. Most of the reviewed studies revealed that silver nanoparticles on dental implant surfaces reduced cytotoxicity but provided a prolonged antibacterial effect. The cytotoxicity and antibacterial effect are closely linked to how the silver nanoparticles are released from the titanium surfaces, where a slower release increases cell viability and proliferation. However, to improve the clinical translation, there is still a need for more studies, especially evaluating the long-term systemic effects and studies recreating the conditions in the oral cavity.

Is There a Better Biomaterial for Dental Implants than Titanium?—A Review and Meta-Study Analysis

This article focuses on preclinical studies and reviews the available evidence from the literature on dental implant and abutment materials in the last decade. Specifically, different peri-implantitis materials and how surface modifications may affect the peri-implant soft-tissue seal and subsequently delay or hinder peri-implantitis are examined. This review analyzed more than 30 studies that were Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs), Controlled Clinical Trials (CCTs), or prospective case series (CS) with at least six months of follow-up. Meta-analyses were performed to make a comparison between different implant materials (titanium vs. zirconia), including impact on bone changes, probing depth, plaque levels, and peri-implant mucosal inflammation, as well as how the properties of the implant material and surface modifications would affect the peri-implant soft-tissue seal and peri-implant health conditions. However, there was no clear evidence regarding whether titanium is better than other implant materials. Clinical evidence suggests no difference between different implant materials in peri-implant bone stability. The metal analysis offered a statistically significant advantage of zirconia implants over titanium regarding developing a favorable response to the alveolar bone.