Clinical evaluation of a novel protocol for supportive periodontal care: A randomized controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy and the patient perception of subgingival debridement with either guided biofilm management (GBM) or conventional scaling and root planing (SRP) during supportive periodontal care (SPC). METHODS: Forty-one patients in SPC were randomly assigned to either treatment with GBM or SRP every 6 months. The primary outcome was the percentage of bleeding on probing (BoP) at 1 year. Moreover, pocket probing depths (PPD), recession, and furcation involvements were also measured. Full-mouth and specific site analyzes were performed at baseline, 6 and 12 months of SPC. Patient comfort was evaluated using a visual analogue scale (VAS) at 12 months. RESULTS: At 1 year, mean BoP percentage decreased from 12.2% to 9.0% (p = 0.191) and from 14.7% to 7.9% (p = 0.004) for the GBM and SRP groups, respectively. Furcation involved multirooted teeth but no through-and-through lesions were significantly fewer in the GBM than in the SRP group after 12 months (p = 0.015). The remaining parameters showed slight improvement in both groups without any statistically significant differences between the two groups after 1 year. Pain evaluation as patient reported outcome measures (pain evaluation) was in favor (p = 0.347) of the SRP group, while overall satisfaction was similar for both groups. Treatment time was not statistically significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.188). CONCLUSION: In well-maintained SPC patients, SRP protocols resulted in significant clinical improvements in terms of BoP; however, for the other clinical improvements, similar efficacy for both GBM and SRP was observed.

Longitudinal assessment of peri-implant diseases in patients with and without history of periodontitis: A 20-year follow-up study.

PURPOSE: To longitudinally assess the prevalence of peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis in a cohort of patients with and without history of periodontitis over a 20-year period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-four patients who attended a specialist private periodontal practice were evaluated prospectively 10 and 20 years after prosthesis delivery. Following successful completion of periodontal/implant therapy, patients (172 implants) were enrolled on an individualised supportive periodontal care programme. Clinical and radiographic parameters were collected to assess the prevalence of peri-implant health and diseases. Prevalence of peri-implantitis and peri-implant mucositis was calculated based on the case definition set out in 2018. A multilevel logistic regression analysis was conducted to assess potential risk or protective factors. RESULTS: The analysis was performed on 22 periodontally healthy and 62 periodontally compromised patients rehabilitated with 39 and 130 implants, respectively. The 10-year prevalence of peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis was 21.4%, 67.9% and 10.6%, respectively, whereas the 20-year prevalence was 29.8%, 47.6% and 33.3%, respectively. Non-compliant periodontally compromised patients showed a statistically significantly increased risk at 20 years of both peri-implant mucositis (odds ratio 11.1; 95% confidence interval 1.8-68.6) and peri-implantitis (bone loss and probing depth) (odds ratio 14.3; 95% confidence interval 1.8-32.9). High full-mouth plaque and bleeding scores were associated with higher odds of both peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. CONCLUSIONS: Peri-implant diseases were prevalent in patients rehabilitated with dental implants and followed up for a period of 20 years. History of periodontal disease and a lack of compliance with a tailored supportive periodontal care programme were identified as risk factors for peri-implant diseases.

Marginal bone level changes around dental implants with one or two adjacent teeth - A clinical and radiographic retrospective study with a follow-up of at least 10 years.

AIM: To compare mean bone level (mBL) changes around dental implants with one or two adjacent teeth after a function time of ≥10 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred thirty three periodontally compromised patients (PCPs) with 551 implants enrolled in supportive periodontal care (SPC) were screened. Implants were categorized either into group TIT (tooth-implant-tooth) or into group TIG (tooth-implant-gap). MBL changes from delivery of restoration (i.e., baseline) to follow-up were calculated in millimeters and compared between implants and adjacent teeth. Survival rates and the need for surgical interventions during SPC were recorded. RESULTS: Eighty seven patients with 142 implants were re-evaluated after a mean observation time of 14.5 ± 3.5 years. The mBL at mesial implant sites in the TIT group increased -0.07 ± 0.92 mm and decreased in the TIG group 0.52 ± 1.34 mm, respectively (95% CI: 0.04/1.14, p = .037). At distal implant sites, the mBL in the TIT group increased -0.08 ± 0.84 mm and decreased 0.03 ± 0.87 in the TIG group, respectively (95% CI: -0.20/0.42, p = .48). The overall implant loss rate was 3.5% (n = 5; 2 TIT, 3 TIG), without a statistically significant difference between the two groups (95% CI: 0.18/7.07, p = .892). Tooth loss rates (TIT: 12.3%, TIG: 12.3%) were not statistically significantly different (OR = 1.00, p = .989). CONCLUSION: High tooth and implant survival rates were observed in PCPs. The presence of one or two adjacent teeth seemed to have no impact on marginal bone level changes.