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.

Evaluation of the implant disease risk assessment (IDRA) tool: A retrospective study in patients with treated periodontitis and implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs).

AIM: To evaluate the Implant Disease Risk Assessment (IDRA) tool for the prediction of peri-implantitis in treated periodontitis patients with implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) after at least 5 years of function. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From the patient pool of implant patients enrolled in a regular supportive periodontal therapy programme (SPT) for at least 5 years, 239 patients were screened. Eighty patients met the inclusion criteria and underwent evaluation through the criteria of the IDRA tool. Areas under the curve (AUCs) for receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves including 95% confidence intervals were estimated. RESULTS: Seventy-nine patients (43 males and 36 females, 8 smokers), aged on average 59.0 years (range: 40-79 years) at baseline (i.e. FDP delivery) were analysed. The calculated IDRA-risk was in 34 patients (42.5%) a moderate risk, while 45 patients (56.3%) were considered at high IDRA-risk. One patient categorized at low IDRA-risk was excluded from the analysis. The AUC was 0.613 (95% CI: 0.464-0.762) if the IDRA-risk was associated with prevalence of peri-implantitis at the most recent follow-up. Peri-implantitis was diagnosed in 4 patients (12%) at moderate and in 12 patients (27%) at high IDRA-risk, respectively. The calculated odds ratio for developing peri-implantitis in patients with high IDRA-risk compared with patients with moderate IDRA-risk was 2.727 with no statistically significant difference between the two groups (95% CI: 0.793-9.376). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of the present retrospective study, the IDRA algorithm might represent a promising tool to assess patients at moderate or high risk of developing peri-implantitis.

Soft tissue grafting to improve the attached mucosa at dental implants: A review of the literature and proposal of a decision tree.

BACKGROUND: Scientific data and clinical observations appear to indicate that an adequate width of attached mucosa may facilitate oral hygiene procedures thus preventing peri-implant inflammation and tissue breakdown (eg, biologic complications). Consequently, in order to avoid biologic complications and improve long-term prognosis, soft tissue conditions should be carefully evaluated when implant therapy is planned. At present the necessity and time-point for soft tissue grafting (eg, prior to or during implant placement or after healing) is still controversially discussed while clinical recommendations are vague. OBJECTIVES: To provide a review of the literature on the role of attached mucosa to maintain periimplant health, and to propose a decision tree which may help the clinician to select the appropriate surgical technique for increasing the width of attached mucosa. RESULTS: The available data indicate that ideally, soft tissue conditions should be optimized by various grafting procedures either before or during implant placement or as part of stage-two surgery. In cases, where, despite insufficient peri-implant soft tissue condition (ie, lack of attached mucosa or movements caused by buccal frena), implants have been uncovered and/or loaded, or in cases where biologic complications are already present (eg, mucositis, peri-implantitis), the treatment appears to be more difficult and less predictable. CONCLUSION: Soft tissue grafting may be important to prevent peri-implant tissue breakdown and should be considered when dental implants are placed. The presented decision tree may help the clinician to select the appropriate grafting technique.

Cumulative costs for the prosthetic reconstructions and maintenance in young adult patients with birth defects affecting the formation of teeth.

OBJECTIVES: To assess retrospectively the cumulative costs for the long-term oral rehabilitation of patients with birth defects affecting the development of teeth. METHODS: Patients with birth defects who had received fixed reconstructions on teeth and/or implants > or =5 years ago were asked to participate in a comprehensive clinical, radiographic and economic evaluation. RESULTS: From the 45 patients included, 18 were cases with a cleft lip and palate, five had amelogenesis/dentinogenesis imperfecta and 22 were cases with hypodontia/oligodontia. The initial costs for the first oral rehabilitation (before the age of 20) had been covered by the Swiss Insurance for Disability. The costs for the initial rehabilitation of the 45 cases amounted to 407,584 CHF (39% for laboratory fees). Linear regression analyses for the initial treatment costs per replaced tooth revealed the formula 731 CHF+(811 CHF x units) on teeth and 3369 CHF+(1183 CHF x units) for reconstructions on implants (P<.001). Fifty-eight percent of the patients with tooth-supported reconstructions remained free from failures/complications (median observation 15.7 years). Forty-seven percent of the patients with implant-supported reconstructions remained free from failures/complications (median observation 8 years). The long-term cumulative treatment costs for implant cases, however, were not statistically significantly different compared with cases reconstructed with tooth-supported fixed reconstructions. Twenty-seven percent of the initial treatment costs were needed to cover supportive periodontal therapy as well as the treatment of technical/biological complications and failures. CONCLUSION: Insurance companies should accept to cover implant-supported reconstructions because there is no need to prepare healthy teeth, fewer tooth units need to be replaced and the cumulative long-term costs seem to be similar compared with cases restored on teeth.