Favorable subgingival plaque microbiome shifts are associated with clinical treatment for peri-implant diseases.

We performed a longitudinal shotgun metagenomic investigation of the plaque microbiome associated with peri-implant diseases in a cohort of 91 subjects with 320 quality-controlled metagenomes. Through recently improved taxonomic profiling methods, we identified the most discriminative species between healthy and diseased subjects at baseline, evaluated their change over time, and provided evidence that clinical treatment had a positive effect on plaque microbiome composition in patients affected by mucositis and peri-implantitis.

Factors influencing outcomes of surgical therapy of peri-implantitis: A secondary analysis of 1-year results from a randomized clinical study.

AIM: To identify predictors of treatment outcomes following surgical therapy of peri-implantitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing access flap with or without bone replacement graft. Outcomes at 12 months were probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP), soft-tissue recession (REC) and marginal bone level (MBL) change. Multilevel regression analyses were used to identify predictors. We also built an explanatory model for residual signs of inflammation. RESULTS: Baseline PPD was the most relevant predictor, showing positive associations with final PPD, REC and MBL gain, and negative association with probability of pocket closure. Smokers presented higher residual PPD. Absence of keratinized mucosa at baseline increased the probability of BOP but was otherwise not indicative of outcomes. Plaque at 6 weeks was detrimental in terms of residual PPD and BOP. Treatment allocation had an effect on REC. Final BOP was explained by residual PPD ≥6 mm and plaque at more than two sites. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline PPD was the most relevant predictor of the outcomes of surgical therapy of peri-implantitis. Pocket closure should be a primary goal of treatment. Bone replacement grafts may be indicated in aesthetically demanding cases to reduce soft-tissue recession. The importance of smoking cessation and patient-performed plaque control is also underlined.

Reliability assessment of the 2018 classification case definitions of peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis, and peri-implantitis.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability and accuracy in the assignment of the case definitions of peri-implant health and diseases according to the 2018 Classification of Periodontal and Peri-implant Diseases and Conditions. METHODS: Ten undergraduate students, 10 general dentists, and 10 experts in implant dentistry participated in this study. All examiners were provided with clinical and radiographic documentation of 25 dental implants. Eleven out the 25 cases were also accompanied by baseline readings. Examiners were asked to define all cases using the 2018 classification case definitions. Reliability among examiners was evaluated using the Fleiss kappa statistic. Accuracy was estimated using percentage of complete agreement and quadratic weighted kappa for pairwise comparisons between each rater and a gold standard diagnosis. RESULTS: The Fleiss kappa was 0.50 (95% CI: 0.48 to 0.51) and the mean quadratic weighted kappa value was 0.544. Complete agreement with the gold standard diagnosis was achieved in 59.8% of the cases. Expertise in implantology affected accuracy positively (p < 0.001) while the absence of baseline readings affected it negatively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Both reliability and accuracy in assigning case definitions to dental implants according to the 2018 classification were mostly moderate. Some difficulties arose in the presence of specific challenging scenarios.

Prognostic value of a composite outcome measure for periodontal stability following periodontal regenerative treatment: A retrospective analysis at 4 years.

BACKGROUND: Recently, a composite outcome measure (COM) was proposed to describe the short-term results of periodontal regenerative treatment. The present retrospective study aimed at evaluating the prognostic value of COM on clinical attachment level (CAL) change over a 4-year period of supportive periodontal care (SPC). METHODS: Seventy-four intraosseous defects in 59 patients were evaluated at 6 months and 4 years following regenerative treatment. Based on 6-month CAL change and probing depth (PD), defects were classified as: COM1 (CAL gain ≥3 mm, PD ≤4 mm); COM2 (CAL gain <3 mm, PD ≤4 mm); COM3 (CAL gain ≥3 mm, PD >4 mm); or COM4 (CAL gain <3 mm, PD >4 mm). COM groups were compared for "stability" (i.e., CAL gain, no change in CAL or CAL loss <1 mm) at 4 years. Also, groups were compared for mean change in PD and CAL, need for surgical retreatment, and tooth survival. RESULTS: At 4 years, the proportion of stable defects in COM1, COM2, COM3, and COM4 group was 69.2%, 75%, 50%, and 28.6%, respectively, with a substantially higher probability for a defect to show stability for COM1, COM2, and COM3 compared with COM4 (odds ratio 4.6, 9.1, and 2.4, respectively). Although higher prevalence of surgical reinterventions and lower tooth survival were observed in COM4, no significant differences were detected among COM groups. CONCLUSIONS: COM may be of value in predicting CAL change at sites undergoing SPC following periodontal regenerative surgery. Studies on larger cohorts, however, are needed to substantiate the present findings.

Prevention and management of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis: A systematic review of outcome measures used in clinical studies in the last 10 years.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate outcome measures, methods of assessment, and analysis in clinical studies on the prevention and management of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. METHODS: Systematic electronic searches (CENTRAL/MEDLINE/SCOPUS) up to April 2021 were conducted to identify longitudinal clinical studies with ≥10 patients on either the prevention or management of peri-implant diseases. Outcome measures of this analysis were the choice of outcome measures, methods of assessment, and analytical methods. Risk of bias was evaluated according to study design. Data were extracted into evidence tables and outcomes were analysed in a descriptive manner. RESULTS: The analysis of the 159 selected studies revealed that probing pocket depth (PPD) and bleeding/suppuration on probing (BOP) were reported in 89% and 87% of all studies, respectively. Additional outcome measures included plaque scores (reported in 64% of studies), radiographic outcomes (49%), soft tissue dimensions (34%), and composite outcomes (26%). Adverse events (8%) and patient-reported outcomes (6%) were only rarely mentioned. A primary outcome measure was clearly defined only in 36% of studies. Data on PPD, radiographic outcomes, and soft tissue dimensions were primarily reported as mean values and rarely as frequency distributions. For radiographic outcomes and soft tissue dimensions, it was frequently unclear how clustered data were handled. CONCLUSIONS: PPD and BOP were routinely reported in studies on the prevention and management of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis, while composite outcomes, adverse events, and patient-reported outcomes were only infrequently described.

Prevention and management of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis: A systematic review of outcome measures used in clinical studies in the last 10 years.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate outcome measures, methods of assessment, and analysis in clinical studies on the prevention and management of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. METHODS: Systematic electronic searches (CENTRAL/MEDLINE/SCOPUS) up to April 2021 were conducted to identify longitudinal clinical studies with ≥10 patients on either the prevention or management of peri-implant diseases. Outcome measures of this analysis were the choice of outcome measures, methods of assessment, and analytical methods. Risk of bias was evaluated according to study design. Data were extracted into evidence tables and outcomes were analysed in a descriptive manner. RESULTS: The analysis of the 159 selected studies revealed that probing pocket depth (PPD) and bleeding/suppuration on probing (BOP) were reported in 89% and 87% of all studies, respectively. Additional outcome measures included plaque scores (reported in 64% of studies), radiographic outcomes (49%), soft tissue dimensions (34%), and composite outcomes (26%). Adverse events (8%) and patient-reported outcomes (6%) were only rarely mentioned. A primary outcome measure was clearly defined only in 36% of studies. Data on PPD, radiographic outcomes, and soft tissue dimensions were primarily reported as mean values and rarely as frequency distributions. For radiographic outcomes and soft tissue dimensions, it was frequently unclear how clustered data were handled. CONCLUSIONS: PPD and BOP were routinely reported in studies on the prevention and management of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis, while composite outcomes, adverse events, and patient-reported outcomes were only infrequently described.

Scientific rationale for study: In 2012, recommendations on study design, key outcome measures, and reporting in clinical studies on the prevention and management of peri-implant diseases were presented. We aimed to evaluate how these recommendations were adapted and utilized in relevant studies published during the last decade. Principal findings: Recommendations on outcome measures and reporting in clinical studies on the prevention and management of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis were only partially followed. Practical implications: When evaluating the evidence on the prevention and management of peri-implant diseases, the clinician should be aware of the limitations in terms of choice of outcome measures and data reporting.

Efficacy of access flap and pocket elimination procedures in the management of peri-implantitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of access flap and pocket elimination procedures in the surgical treatment of peri-implantitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Systematic electronic searches (Central/MEDLINE/EMBASE) up to March 2022 were conducted to identify prospective clinical studies evaluating surgical therapy (access flap or pocket elimination procedures) of peri-implantitis. Primary outcome measures were reduction of probing depth (PD) and bleeding on probing (BOP). Risk of bias was evaluated according to study design. Meta-analysis and meta-regression were performed. Results were expressed as standardized mean effect with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Evidence from studies directly comparing surgical with non-surgical therapy is lacking. Based on pre-post data originating from 13 prospective patient cohorts, pronounced reductions of PD (standardized mean effect: 2.2 mm; 95% CI 1.8-2.7) and BOP% (27.0; 95% CI 19.8-34.2) as well as marginal bone level gain (0.2 mm; 95% CI -0.0 to 0.5) were observed at evaluation time points ranging from 1 to 5 years. Wide prediction intervals suggested a high degree of heterogeneity. Reduction of mean PD increased by 0.7 mm (95% CI 0.5-0.9) for every millimetre in increase of mean PD at baseline. During the follow-up period ranging from 1 to 5 years, disease recurrence occurred frequently and implant loss was not uncommon. CONCLUSIONS: Access flap and pocket elimination surgery are effective procedures in the management of peri-implantitis, although rates of disease recurrence during 5 years were high. Treatment outcomes were affected by baseline conditions.

A randomized multi-centre study on the effectiveness of non-surgical periodontal therapy in general practice.

AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness of two non-surgical treatment protocols for periodontitis patients in general dental practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-five dental hygienists (59 dental clinics) were randomly assigned to one of two treatment protocols: (i) establishment of adequate self-performed oral hygiene prior to a single session of ultrasonic instrumentation (guided periodontal infection control [GPIC]) or (ii) conventional non-surgical therapy (CNST) including patient education and scaling and root planing integrated in multiple sessions. Residual pockets at 3 months were retreated in both groups. The primary outcome was pocket closure (probing pocket depth ≤ 4 mm) at 6 months. Multilevel models were utilized. RESULTS: Based on data from 615 patients, no significant differences with regard to clinical outcomes were observed between treatment protocols. Treatment-related costs (i.e., chair time, number of sessions) were significantly lower for GPIC than CNST. Smoking and age significantly affected treatment outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences between the two approaches were observed in regard to clinical outcomes. GPIC was more time-effective. Patient education should include information on the detrimental effects of smoking. CLINICALTRIALS: gov (NCT02168621).

Reconstructive surgical therapy of peri-implantitis: A multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the potential benefit of the use of a bone substitute material in the reconstructive surgical therapy of peri-implantitis. METHODS: In this multicenter randomized clinical trial, 138 patients (147 implants) with peri-implantitis were treated surgically, randomized by coin toss to either a control (access flap surgery) or a test group (reconstructive surgery using bone substitute material). Clinical assessments, including probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding and suppuration on probing (BOP & SOP) as well as soft tissue recession (REC), were recorded at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Marginal bone levels (MBL), measured on intra-oral radiographs, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were recorded at baseline and 12 months. No blinding to group allocation was performed. The primary outcome at 12 months was a composite measure including (i) implant not lost, (ii) absence of BOP/SOP at all aspects, (iii) PPD ≤5 mm at all aspects and (iv) ≤1 mm recession of mucosal margin on the buccal aspect of the implant. Secondary outcomes included (i) changes of MBL, (ii) changes of PPD, BOP%, and buccal KM, (iii) buccal REC and (iv) patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: During follow-up, four implants (one in the test group, three in the control group) in four patients were removed due to disease progression. At 12 months, a total of 69 implants in the test and 68 implants in the control group were examined. Thus, 16.4% and 13.5% of implants in the test and control group, respectively, met all predefined criteria of the composite outcome. PPD reduction and MBL gain were 3.7 mm and about 1.0 mm in both groups. Reduction in mean BOP% varied between 45% (test) and 50% (control), without significant differences between groups. Buccal REC was less pronounced in the test group (M = 0.7, SD = 0.9 mm) when compared to controls (M = 1.1, SD = 1.5 mm). PROs were favorable in both groups without significant differences. One case of allergic reaction to the antibiotic therapy was recorded. No other adverse events were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical therapy of peri-implantitis effectively improved the clinical and radiographic status at 12 months. While the use of a bone substitute material did not improve reductions of PPD and BOP, buccal REC was less pronounced in the test group. Patient satisfaction was high in both groups.

Strong oral plaque microbiome signatures for dental implant diseases identified by strain-resolution metagenomics.

Dental implants are installed in an increasing number of patients. Mucositis and peri-implantitis are common microbial-biofilm-associated diseases affecting the tissues that surround the dental implant and are a major medical and socioeconomic burden. By metagenomic sequencing of the plaque microbiome in different peri-implant health and disease conditions (113 samples from 72 individuals), we found microbial signatures for peri-implantitis and mucositis and defined the peri-implantitis-related complex (PiRC) composed by the 7 most discriminative bacteria. The peri-implantitis microbiome is site specific as contralateral healthy sites resembled more the microbiome of healthy implants, while mucositis was specifically enriched for Fusobacterium nucleatum acting as a keystone colonizer. Microbiome-based machine learning showed high diagnostic and prognostic power for peri-implant diseases and strain-level profiling identified a previously uncharacterized subspecies of F. nucleatum to be particularly associated with disease. Altogether, we associated the plaque microbiome with peri-implant diseases and identified microbial signatures of disease severity.

Five-year prospective study on conometric retention for complete fixed prostheses.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the reliability of a conometric system for fixed retention of complete prostheses (CPs) on four implants after 5 years of function. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-five patients with a completely edentulous mandible received four implants supporting a CP. A total of 100 implants were immediately loaded with CPs on conometric abutments. A follow-up of 5 years was observed for each patient. Outcome measures were prosthesis and implant success, complications, probing pocket depth changes, marginal bleeding and plaque changes, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: One patient dropped-out. In total, 96 implants supporting the 24 CPs completed the follow-up examination at 5 years. No implant failed. Two framework fractures occurred after 4 and 5 years of function. No loss of retention was recorded for the CPs. Mucositis was recorded for two implants after 1 year of prostheses function for two patients, for one implant after 3 years and for two implants after 4 years in different patients and successfully treated with interceptive supportive therapy. No significant differences were found between Plaque Index (PI) at baseline and after 2 years (P = 1.0); similar findings were calculated between PI at baseline and after 5 years (P = 0.6) of function. At baseline, after 2 and after 5 years, respectively, 69%, 64% and 56% of implants showed a PI of 0; 31%, 36% and 44% of implants showed a PI between 1 and 3. Modify Bleeding Index (MBI) was not significantly different both between baseline and after 2 years of function (P = 1.0) and between baseline and 5 years of function (P = 0.5). At baseline, after 2 and after 5 years, respectively, 69%, 65% and 61% of implants showed a MBI of 0; 27%, 28% and 29% of implants showed a MBI of 1; and 4%, 7% and 10% of implants showed a MBI of 2. The mean probing pocket depth was 1.2 ± 0.4 mm at baseline, 1.2 ± 0.4 mm after 2 years and 1.4 ± 0.5 mm after 5 years of function. The differences were not statistically significant between baseline and 2 years (P = 1.0) and between baseline and 5 years (P = 0.1). From the patient satisfaction questionnaire, 85% percent of patients were satisfied from both aesthetic and functional points of view after 5 years of conometric prostheses function. CONCLUSIONS: The present implant-supported conometric retention system can be used to give fixed retention to a CP supported by four implants. An adequate metal framework should be provided to the definitive restoration in order to avoid fractures in the long term.

Efficacy of reconstructive surgical therapy at peri-implantitis-related bone defects. A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The present systematic review aimed at evaluating the efficacy of reconstructive surgical therapy at peri-implantitis-related bone defects. METHODS: Studies reporting on outcomes of reconstructive surgery at peri-implantitis-related bone defects at 12 months were identified through an electronic search. Following data extraction, two different sets of meta-analyses were performed. Primarily, controlled studies were used to evaluate the potential benefit of reconstructive surgical therapy over controls. Secondly, overall outcome of reconstructive surgical therapy was assessed by comparing baseline values with outcomes at 12 months. Results were expressed as weighted mean differences (WMD) or risk ratios (RR). Heterogeneity was described by I2 and prediction intervals. RESULTS: The potential benefit of reconstructive techniques over control procedures was evaluated in three studies, representing a total of 116 implants. Altogether, 16 studies reported on the outcome of reconstructive measures at 12 months after surgery. The meta-analyses identified a larger improvement in marginal bone levels (MBL, WMD = 1.7 mm) and in defect fill (WMD = 57%) for test procedures, but found no differences for clinical measures (reduction of probing depth (PD) and bleeding on probing (BOP). Changes of clinical attachment and soft tissue levels were not considered. In terms of overall outcome, therapy resulted in improved MBL (WMD = 2.0 mm) and CAL (WMD = 1.8 mm), in recession (WMD = 0.7 mm), in reduced PD (WMD = 2.8 mm) and in reduced BOP (Implants: RR = 0.4/Sites: RR = 0.2). None of the included studies addressed patient-reported outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence on reconstructive therapy at peri-implantitis-related defects is limited by (a) the low number of controlled studies, (b) the lack of controlled studies for commonly used procedures, (c) the heterogeneity between studies and (d) the choice of outcome measures. A high variability for predicted outcomes at 12 months was noted. The interpretation of the demonstrated larger MBL gain for test procedures is difficult as graft material may not be distinguishable from newly formed bone. Potential aesthetic and patient-reported advantages remain to be demonstrated.

Group 4 ITI Consensus Report: Risks and biologic complications associated with implant dentistry.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of Working Group 4 was to address topics related to biologic risks and complications associated with implant dentistry. Focused questions on (a) diagnosis of peri-implantitis, (b) complications associated with implants in augmented sites, (c) outcomes following treatment of peri-implantitis, and (d) implant therapy in geriatric patients and/or patients with systemic diseases were addressed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four systematic reviews formed the basis for discussion in Group 4. Participants developed statements and recommendations determined by group consensus based on the findings of the systematic reviews. These were then presented and accepted following further discussion and modifications as required by the plenary. RESULTS: Bleeding on probing (BOP) alone is insufficient for the diagnosis of peri-implantitis. The positive predictive value of BOP alone for the diagnosis of peri-implantitis varies and is dependent on the prevalence of peri-implantitis within the population. For patients with implants in augmented sites, the prevalence of peri-implantitis and implant loss is low over the medium to long term. Peri-implantitis treatment protocols which include individualized supportive care result in high survival of implants after 5 years with about three-quarters of implants still present. Advanced age alone is not a contraindication for implant therapy. Implant placement in patients with cancer receiving high-dose antiresorptive therapy is contraindicated due to the associated high risk for complications. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnosis of peri-implantitis requires the presence of BOP as well as progressive bone loss. Prevalence of peri-implantitis for implants in augmented sites is low. Peri-implantitis treatment should be followed by individualized supportive care. Implant therapy for geriatric patients is not contraindicated; however, comorbidities and autonomy should be considered.

Long-term biological complications of dental implants placed either in pristine or in augmented sites: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIM: To investigate and compare the prevalence of biological complications and failure of implants placed in pristine vs. augmented sites after a mean observation period of at least 10 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The focused question "In patients with osseointegrated dental implants, are there differences in biological complications and implant failure at implants placed in pristine vs. augmented sites?" was addressed using the Population, Exposure, Comparison and Outcome criteria. Electronic and manual searches supplemented by the screening of the grey literature were carried out. A case definition of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis had to be specified. The binary random-effects method was chosen to conduct meta-analyses. Results are presented as Forest plots with weighted mean values and 95% confidence intervals (CI). The I2 statistic test was applied to quantify heterogeneity. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the parameters provided in the Cochrane Center and CONSORT statement were used for quality assessment. The results are reported according to the PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: No randomized clinical trial (RCT) comparing the outcomes of implants placed in pristine vs. augmented sites was identified. Five case-series studies, one case-control study, one cross-sectional study and one RCT were eligible for qualitative and quantitative analyses. No statistically significant differences (p > .05) were observed between implants placed in pristine vs. augmented sites for any outcome variables both at patient and at implant levels, respectively. High heterogeneity concerning patient sampling, case definitions of biological complications and eligibility criteria was observed. CONCLUSION: The studies included in the present systematic review did not directly address the focused questions. Hence, the outcomes of the meta-analysis should be interpreted with caution due to high variability with respect to study design.

Peri-implant diseases and conditions: Consensus report of workgroup 4 of the 2017 World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases and Conditions.

A classification for peri-implant diseases and conditions was presented. Focused questions on the characteristics of peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis, peri-implantitis, and soft- and hard-tissue deficiencies were addressed. Peri-implant health is characterized by the absence of erythema, bleeding on probing, swelling, and suppuration. It is not possible to define a range of probing depths compatible with health; Peri-implant health can exist around implants with reduced bone support. The main clinical characteristic of peri-implant mucositis is bleeding on gentle probing. Erythema, swelling, and/or suppuration may also be present. An increase in probing depth is often observed in the presence of peri-implant mucositis due to swelling or decrease in probing resistance. There is strong evidence from animal and human experimental studies that plaque is the etiological factor for peri-implant mucositis. Peri-implantitis is a plaque-associated pathological condition occurring in tissues around dental implants, characterized by inflammation in the peri-implant mucosa and subsequent progressive loss of supporting bone. Peri-implantitis sites exhibit clinical signs of inflammation, bleeding on probing, and/or suppuration, increased probing depths and/or recession of the mucosal margin in addition to radiographic bone loss. The evidence is equivocal regarding the effect of keratinized mucosa on the long-term health of the peri-implant tissue. It appears, however, that keratinized mucosa may have advantages regarding patient comfort and ease of plaque removal. Case definitions in day-to-day clinical practice and in epidemiological or disease-surveillance studies for peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis, and peri-implantitis were introduced. The proposed case definitions should be viewed within the context that there is no generic implant and that there are numerous implant designs with different surface characteristics, surgical and loading protocols. It is recommended that the clinician obtain baseline radiographic and probing measurements following the completion of the implant-supported prosthesis.

Peri-implant diseases and conditions: Consensus report of workgroup 4 of the 2017 World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases and Conditions.

A classification for peri-implant diseases and conditions was presented. Focused questions on the characteristics of peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis, peri-implantitis, and soft- and hard-tissue deficiencies were addressed. Peri-implant health is characterized by the absence of erythema, bleeding on probing, swelling, and suppuration. It is not possible to define a range of probing depths compatible with health; Peri-implant health can exist around implants with reduced bone support. The main clinical characteristic of peri-implant mucositis is bleeding on gentle probing. Erythema, swelling, and/or suppuration may also be present. An increase in probing depth is often observed in the presence of peri-implant mucositis due to swelling or decrease in probing resistance. There is strong evidence from animal and human experimental studies that plaque is the etiological factor for peri-implant mucositis. Peri-implantitis is a plaque-associated pathological condition occurring in tissues around dental implants, characterized by inflammation in the peri-implant mucosa and subsequent progressive loss of supporting bone. Peri-implantitis sites exhibit clinical signs of inflammation, bleeding on probing, and/or suppuration, increased probing depths and/or recession of the mucosal margin in addition to radiographic bone loss. The evidence is equivocal regarding the effect of keratinized mucosa on the long-term health of the peri-implant tissue. It appears, however, that keratinized mucosa may have advantages regarding patient comfort and ease of plaque removal. Case definitions in day-to-day clinical practice and in epidemiological or disease-surveillance studies for peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis, and peri-implantitis were introduced. The proposed case definitions should be viewed within the context that there is no generic implant and that there are numerous implant designs with different surface characteristics, surgical and loading protocols. It is recommended that the clinician obtain baseline radiographic and probing measurements following the completion of the implant-supported prosthesis.

Effect of Oral Administration of Bromelain on Postoperative Discomfort After Third Molar Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this prospective randomized controlled clinical trial was to evaluate the effect of oral administration of bromelain on discomfort after mandibular third molar surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-four consecutive patients requiring surgical removal of a single mandibular impacted third molar under local anesthesia were randomly assigned to receiving no drug (control group, Group A), postoperative 40 mg bromelain every 6 hours for 6 days (Group B), preoperative 4 mg dexamethasone sodium phosphate as a submucosal injection (Group C), and preoperative 4 mg dexamethasone sodium phosphate as a submucosal injection plus postoperative 40 mg bromelain every 6 hours for 6 days (Group D). Standardized surgical and analgesic protocols were adopted. Maximum interincisal distance and facial contours were measured at baseline and on postoperative days 2 and 7. Pain was measured objectively by counting the number of analgesic tablets required. Patient perception of the severity of symptoms was assessed with a follow-up questionnaire (PoSSe scale). RESULTS: On postoperative day 2, there was a statistically significant reduction in facial edema in both Groups C and D compared with the control group, but no statistically significant differences were observed between Group B and the control group. At evaluation on postoperative day 7, Group D showed a statistically significant reduction in postoperative swelling compared with the control group. The combined use of bromelain and dexamethasone (Group D) induced a statistically significant reduction in the total number of analgesic tablets taken after surgery compared with the control group. The treatment groups had a limited, nonsignificant effect on trismus when compared with the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Bromelain used singly showed moderate anti-inflammatory efficacy, reducing postoperative swelling, albeit not to any significant extent compared with no drug administration. The combined use of bromelain and dexamethasone sodium phosphate yielded the best results in terms of control of postoperative discomfort.

Change in the Gingival Margin Profile After the Single Flap Approach in Periodontal Intraosseous Defects.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study is to evaluate the association of patient-related and site-specific factors, as well as the adopted treatment modality, with the change in buccal (bREC) and interdental (iREC) gingival recession observed at 6 months after treatment of periodontal intraosseous defects with the single flap approach (SFA). METHODS: Sixty-six patients contributing 74 intraosseous defects accessed with a buccal SFA and treated with different modalities were selected retrospectively. A two-level (patient and site) model was constructed, with the 6-month changes in bREC and iREC as the dependent variables. RESULTS: (1) Significant 6-month increases in bREC (-0.6 ± 0.7 mm) and iREC (-0.9 ± 1.1 mm) were observed. (2) bREC change was significantly predicted by presurgery interproximal probing depth (PD) and depth of osseous dehiscence at the buccal aspect. (3) iREC change was significantly predicted by presurgery interproximal PD and the treatment modality, with defects treated with SFA in combination with a graft material and a bioactive agent being less prone to iREC increase compared to defects treated with SFA alone. CONCLUSIONS: After buccal SFA, greater post-surgery increase in bREC must be expected for deep intraosseous defects associated with a buccal dehiscence. The combination of a graft material and a bioactive agent in adjunct to the SFA may limit the postoperative increase in iREC.

Primary prevention of peri-implantitis: managing peri-implant mucositis.

AIMS: Over the past decades, the placement of dental implants has become a routine procedure in the oral rehabilitation of fully and partially edentulous patients. However, the number of patients/implants affected by peri-implant diseases is increasing. As there are--in contrast to periodontitis--at present no established and predictable concepts for the treatment of peri-implantitis, primary prevention is of key importance. The management of peri-implant mucositis is considered as a preventive measure for the onset of peri-implantitis. Therefore, the remit of this working group was to assess the prevalence of peri-implant diseases, as well as risks for peri-implant mucositis and to evaluate measures for the management of peri-implant mucositis. METHODS: Discussions were informed by four systematic reviews on the current epidemiology of peri-implant diseases, on potential risks contributing to the development of peri-implant mucositis, and on the effect of patient and of professionally administered measures to manage peri-implant mucositis. This consensus report is based on the outcomes of these systematic reviews and on the expert opinion of the participants. RESULTS: Key findings included: (i) meta-analysis estimated a weighted mean prevalence for peri-implant mucositis of 43% (CI: 32-54%) and for peri-implantitis of 22% (CI: 14-30%); (ii) bleeding on probing is considered as key clinical measure to distinguish between peri-implant health and disease; (iii) lack of regular supportive therapy in patients with peri-implant mucositis was associated with increased risk for onset of peri-implantitis; (iv) whereas plaque accumulation has been established as aetiological factor, smoking was identified as modifiable patient-related and excess cement as local risk indicator for the development of peri-implant mucositis; (v) patient-administered mechanical plaque control (with manual or powered toothbrushes) has been shown to be an effective preventive measure; (vi) professional intervention comprising oral hygiene instructions and mechanical debridement revealed a reduction in clinical signs of inflammation; (vii) adjunctive measures (antiseptics, local and systemic antibiotics, air-abrasive devices) were not found to improve the efficacy of professionally administered plaque removal in reducing clinical signs of inflammation. CONCLUSIONS: Consensus was reached on recommendations for patients with dental implants and oral health care professionals with regard to the efficacy of measures to manage peri-implant mucositis. It was particularly emphasized that implant placement and prosthetic reconstructions need to allow proper personal cleaning, diagnosis by probing and professional plaque removal.

Peri-implant health and disease. A systematic review of current epidemiology.

BACKGROUND: To develop preventive strategies addressing peri-implant diseases, a thorough understanding of the epidemiology is required. AIM: The aim was to systematically assess the scientific literature in order to evaluate the prevalence, extent and severity of peri-implant diseases. MATERIAL & METHODS: Data were extracted from identified studies. Meta-analyses for prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis were performed. The effect of function time and disease definition on the prevalence of peri-implantitis was evaluated by meta-regression analyses. Data on extent and severity of peri-implant diseases were estimated if not directly reported. RESULTS: Fifteen articles describing 11 studies were included. Case definitions for mucositis and peri-implantitis varied. The prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis ranged from 19 to 65% and from 1 to 47%, respectively. Meta-analyses estimated weighted mean prevalences of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis of 43% (CI: 32-54%) and 22% (CI: 14-30%), respectively. The meta-regression showed a positive relationship between prevalence of peri-implantitis and function time and a negative relationship between prevalence of peri-implantitis and threshold for bone loss. Extent and severity of peri-implant diseases were rarely reported. CONCLUSION: Future studies on the epidemiology of peri-implant diseases should consider (i) applying consistent case definitions and (ii) assessing random patient samples of adequate size and function time.