Implant failure and clinical and radiographic outcomes after surgical treatment of peri-implantitis: A meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To assess the implant failure rate and clinical and radiographic outcomes of implants affected by peri-implantitis that received surgical treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search was conducted of three databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify studies that examined implant failure and biological outcomes after surgical peri-implantitis treatment, including ≥ 10 patients and reporting on a follow-up period of at least 12 months. Data and risk of bias were assessed qualitatively and quantitively. Surgical modalities were subdivided into reconstructive, non-reconstructive and combined. Meta-analyses were performed for implant failure, marginal bone level and probing pocket depth at 12 and 36 months with the respective subset of available data for each time and endpoint. RESULTS: A total of 45 studies with 3,463 treated implants were included in the quantitative evaluation. Meta-analyses revealed low implant failure rates of 1.2% (95% confidence interval 0.4%, -2.1%) and 4.2% (95% confidence interval 1.0%, -8.8%) at 12 and 36 months, respectively. No significant difference between the subgroups was observed at 12 months. At 36 months, reconstructive modalities showed a significantly lower implant failure rate (1.0%; 95% confidence interval 0.0%, 5.0%; P = 0.04, χ2(1) = 4.1) compared to non-reconstructive modalities (8.0%; 95% confidence interval 2.0%, 18.0%). The mean probing pocket depth was 3.71 mm (95% confidence interval 3.48, 3.94 mm) at 12 months and 3.63 mm (95% confidence interval 3.02, 4.24 mm) at 36 months. The mean marginal bone loss was 3.31 mm (95% confidence interval 2.89, 3.74 mm) at 12 months and 2.38 mm (95% confidence interval 1.01, 3.74 mm) at 36 months. No significant differences between the modalities were observed for bleeding on probing after either of these time points. Cumulative interventions during supportive therapy were reported in 9% of the studies. CONCLUSION: Surgical treatment of peri-implantitis results in a low implant failure rate in the short and medium term. No differences were noted between the different interventions with regard to failure rate. Surrogate therapeutic endpoints were improved after treatment, without significant differences between the different modalities. Therapeutic success and/or disease resolution and cumulative interventions during supportive therapy are seldom reported in the literature, but limited long-term outcomes are documented consistently.

Soft tissue-related complications around anterior implants: commentary and clinical checklist.

Implant-based rehabilitation is a clinical challenge, especially in the esthetic area. Numerous factors influence the outcome of the rehabilitation; however, the two main factors are the bone and soft-tissue deficiencies at the intended implant site. Peri-implant soft tissue complications can arise from a combination of factors that can be summarized as two categories: diagnostic errors and surgical planning management errors. Most of the complications can be corrected after each step of the treatment and even after the delivery of the prosthetic restoration with adequate soft tissue management in order to give the patient an esthetically pleasing outcome. The aims of this article were: to present the current literature, to propose a clinical checklist to guide clinicians in evaluating the prognosis of the treatment utilizing soft tissue grafting, and to illustrate a case series partially employing the proposed clinical checklist. The proposed checklist could be helpful in evaluating the prognosis of the treatment utilizing only soft tissue grafting. In clinical cases in which the prognosis is classified as good, soft tissue management could be a viable treatment option before attempting more radical procedures like implant removal.

Tricalcium phosphate (-containing) biomaterials in the treatment of periodontal infra-bony defects: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to investigate the additional clinical benefit of tricalcium phosphate (TCP) (-containing) biomaterials compared to open flap debridement (OFD) in periodontal infra-bony defects. DATA: A literature search was conducted in Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane library for entries published up to 14th July 2021. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared a TCP (-containing) material with OFD and studies that assessed a beta-TCP group alone, with vertical defect sites with PPD of ≥ 6 mm and/or presence of infra-bony defects of ≥ 3 mm and a minimum follow-up of 6 months were included. Risk of bias was assessed with the Oxford scale. The random-effects (RE) model was synthesized as differences between weighted average (MD) for probing pocket depth (PPD) and clinical attachment level (CAL) between TCP and OFD groups. An RE analysis was also performed for the beta-TCP group alone. STUDY SELECTION: Data from 16 RCTs were included in the analysis. Six studies that represented 151 patients and sites were selected for meta-analysis. The overall MD with 95% CI at 6 months was calculated to be -0.47 [-0.83, -0.12; P = 0.0087] and -1.06 [-1.67, -0.46; P = 0.0006] for PPD and CAL, respectively. Whereas MD at 12 months for PPD and CAL was -0.89 [-1.54, -0.23; P = 0.0078] and -1.25 [-1.85, -0.66; P<0.0001], respectively. All results were in favor of TCP (-containing) group over OFD. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the study suggest that the use of a TCP (-containing) material may have the potential for additional clinical improvement in PPD and CAL compared with OFD in infra-bony defects, given the limitations of the included evidence. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The use of TCP as a bone graft substitute is becoming increasingly common. Therefore, it would be advantageous if an adjunctive benefit in the regeneration of infra-bony defects could be demonstrated to facilitate material selection.

Gingival recession after scaling and root planing with or without systemic metronidazole and amoxicillin: a re-review.

BACKGROUND: Gingival recessions inevitably occur during healing after scaling and root planing, but synoptic data on this topic is still lacking. This review compared the recession formation with and without the administration of systemic antibiotics. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the formation of recession with and without the administration of antibiotics during the healing after scaling and root planing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study re-analyzed publications that reported clinical attachment levels (CAL) and probing pocket depths (PD) up to January 2019, including the pivotal review by Zandbergen and co-workers (2013). Whereas these studies traditionally focused on PD and CAL, the present analysis compared recession formation (ΔREC) after adjunctive systemic administration of amoxicillin (amx) and metronidazole (met) during scaling and root planing (SRP) and SRP alone. The mean increase in ΔREC, if not reported, was calculated from CAL and PD values and statistically analyzed. Recession formation was compared after 3 and 6 months after therapy. Results were separately reported for chronic periodontitis (CP) as well as aggressive periodontitis (AP) cases. RESULTS: Recessions increased consistently between baseline and follow-up. In the AP group, median ΔREC was 0.20 mm after 3 months, irrespective of whether antibiotics were administered or not. After 6 months, median ΔREC increased to 0.35 mm after AB and remained stable at 0.20 mm with SRP alone. In the CP group, after 3 months with and without antibiotics, median ΔREC accounted for 0.30 mm and 0.14 mm, respectively. After 6 months, median ΔREC accounted for 0.28 mm (with AB) and 0.20 mm (without AB). The quantitative assessment by meta-analyses also yielded small values (≤ 0.25 mm) for the estimated differences in recession formation between AB and noAB; however, none of them reached statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Although a slight tendency towards higher recession formation after SRP in combination with AB could be observed in many studies, quantitative meta-analyses showed no clinically relevant difference in recession formation due to the administration of AB. In general, the description and discussion of recessions in the literature seems not to be a major focus so far. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Since the preservation of gingival tissues is important by preventive and therapeutic means, e.g., when avoiding postoperative root sensitivity or performing regenerative surgery, these aspects should not be neglected. We thus suggest to report REC measurements along with PD and CAL values for more direct recession formation (ΔREC) assessments in the future.

Efficacy of chlorhexidine rinses after periodontal or implant surgery: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Biofilm management and infection control are essential after periodontal and implant surgery. In this context, chlorhexidine (CHX) mouth-rinses are frequently recommended post-surgically. Despite its common use and many studies in this field, a systematic evaluation of the benefits after periodontal or implant surgery is-surprisingly-still missing. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits of chlorhexidine rinsing after periodontal or implant surgery in terms of plaque and inflammation reduction potential. Furthermore, to screen whether the concentration changes or additives in CHX solutions reduce side effects associated with its use. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed for clinical trials, which compared CHX rinsing after periodontal or implant surgery with rinsing using placebo, non-staining formulations, or solutions with reduced concentrations of the active compound. Four databases (Medline, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane) were searched up to June 2018. Two reviewers independently identified and screened the literature. RESULTS: From 691 titles identified, only eleven publications met the inclusion criteria and were finally included. Mainly early publications assessed the benefits of CHX over placebo rinsing, whereas more recent publications focused more on the evaluation of new formulations with regard to effectiveness and side effects. The use of CHX after surgery showed in general significant reduction in plaque (means of 29-86% after 1 week) and bleeding (up to 73%) as compared to placebo. No consensus, however, was found regarding the most beneficial CHX formulation avoiding side effects. CONCLUSION: Chlorhexidine rinsing helps to reduce biofilm formation and gingival inflammation after surgery. However, no additional reduction of periodontal probing depth over any given placebo or control solution could be found irrespective of whether CHX was used or not. The use of additives such as antidiscoloration systems (ADS) or herbal extracts may reduce side effects while retaining efficacy. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Within the limitations of this review, it can be concluded that CHX may represent a valuable chemo-preventive tool immediately after surgery, during the time period in which oral hygiene capacity is compromised. To reduce the side effects of CHX and maintain comparable clinical effects, rinsing with less concentrated formulations (e.g., 0.12%) showed the most promising results so far.