The effect of the interproximal contour of single external hexagon implant restorations on the prevalence of peri-implantitis: A retrospective study.

PURPOSE: The objective of this retrospective study was to evaluate the effect of the interproximal contour of single external hexagon implant restorations on the prevalence of peri-implantitis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Records of 96 patients and 148 external hexagon (EH) implants with time in function ranging from 1 to 17 years were included in the study. The most recent clinical and radiographic data were collected from records and the prevalence of peri-implantitis was defined according to the 2017 World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-implant Diseases and Conditions. Marginal bone level (MBL), emergence angle (EA), emergence profile (EP), and crown/implant platform horizontal ratio (CIHR) were obtained from periapical radiographs. Dichotomous variables at the patient- and implant level were compared with association tests. Mann-Whitney U-Test was performed to compare continuous quantitative values between the studied groups. Binomial logistic regression was conducted to identify risk indicators associated with the peri-implantitis event at the patient- and implant level, with the significance level set at 5% for all tests. RESULTS: Nineteen patients (19.2%) and 24 implants (16.2%) with a mean time in function of 5.0 ± 4.7 years were classified as having peri-implantitis. No statistically significant differences concerning gender, mean age, implant location in the jaw, or time in function were observed between patients with or without peri-implantitis (p > 0.05). Of 24 implants with peri-implantitis 10 (41.7%) displayed EA ≤ 30° (16.4%) while 14 (58.3%) presented EA > 30° with no statistical difference between the groups (p > 0.05). No statistically significant associations were identified between EA, EP, or CIHR and the prevalence of peri-implantitis. CONCLUSION: The findings seem to indicate that the EA, EP, and CIHR of single restorations over external hexagon implants are not associated with the presence of peri-implantitis. However, prospective studies with larger samples are required to better ascertain such an association in the long term.

The influence of smoking on the incidence of peri-implantitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to systematically analyze the influence of smoking on the incidence of peri-implantitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The search was performed in the National Library of Medicine (MEDLINE-PubMed), SCOPUS, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Science databases (finished on November 30, 2022). Systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted according to PRISMA statement. Prospective cohort studies that evaluate the incidence of peri-implantitis in smokers and non-smokers were included. Two authors independently searched for eligible studies, screened titles, and abstracts, did the full-text analysis, extracted data, and performed the risk-of-bias assessment. The results were summarized through random-effects meta-analyses. The GRADE method was used to determine the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: A total of 7 studies with 702 patients and 1959 implants were included for analysis. The meta-analysis revealed a significant difference between smokers and non-smokers for the risk of peri-implantitis in the implant-based (p < .0001) and patient-based analysis (p = .003). A strong association between smoking and the risk for peri-implantitis was verified at the implant level (RR: 2.04, 95% CI: 1.46-1.85) and the patient level (RR: 2.79, 95% CI: 1.42-5.50). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate certainty evidence suggests that smoking is associated with peri-implantitis compared to non-smoking at the patient and implant levels.

Long-term impact of patients' compliance to peri-implant maintenance therapy on the incidence of peri-implant diseases: An 11-year prospective follow-up clinical study.

OBJECTIVE: To prospectively evaluate the incidence of peri-implant diseases and the associated risk factors during 11 years of peri-implant maintenance therapy (PIMT). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A sample of 80 partially edentulous individuals rehabilitated with dental implants was invited to participate in a PIMT program (T1-prior to entering the PIMT program). After 11 years, 51 individuals remained regularly or irregularly adherent to PIMT (T2-last recall after 11 years) and were classified as regular (RC; n = 27) or irregular (IC; n = 24) compliers. Data of interest were analyzed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: The incidence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis observed at T2 in the IC group (70.8% and 37.5%, respectively) were significantly higher than those observed in the RC group (37.0% and 11.1%, respectively). The incidence of peri-implant diseases was mostly attributable to potentially modifiable risk factors, as such: RC group-PM (p = 0.013); IC group-high plaque index (p < 0.001), irregular compliance (p < 0.001), the presence of PM (p = 0.015) and periodontitis (p < 0.039). CONCLUSION: Regular compliance during PIMT had a strong effect in minimizing the incidence of peri-implant diseases. Increasing regular dental visits and improving oral hygiene would provide benefits for preventing peri-implant diseases.

The effect of brushing discomfort on peri-implant health in sites exhibiting inadequate keratinized mucosa width: A cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this cross-sectional study was to evaluate the effect of brushing discomfort (BD) on peri-implant health in sites exhibiting inadequate keratinized mucosa (KM) width. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients presenting with at least one implant exhibiting KM <2 mm and in function for ≥1 year were eligible for inclusion. BD was assessed with the visual analogue scale (VAS), and implants were classified into two groups: Absence (aBD; VAS = 0) or Presence (pBD; VAS > 0) of BD. Bleeding on probing (BoP), modified plaque index (mPI), probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), suppuration (Sup), and marginal bone level (MBL) were recorded. Mann-Whitney, chi-square test, and a multilevel model were used for analysis. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients with 155 dental implants were analyzed, of which 60 presented no BD, and 95 presented some level of BD. BoP, PD, CAL, and MBL were significantly higher in the pBD than in the aBD group (p < .05). The prevalence of peri-implant diseases at implant level was also higher in the pBD group than in the aBD group. However, after controlling for confounding factors, only mPI showed an effect on BoP. In addition, difficulty to perform oral hygiene was statistically higher in the pBD group. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of the present study suggest that although BD around implants exhibiting KM <2 mm did not influence tissue inflammation, it could represent a symptom of peri-implant diseases. Further clinical trials assessing the long-term effect of BD must be considered to better ascertain its effects on peri-implant health.

Does implant location influence the risk of peri-implantitis?

Peri-implantitis is characterized by nonreversible and progressive loss of supporting bone and is associated with bleeding and/or suppuration on probing. Peri-implant disease is considered as the main etiologic factor related to implant failure. Peri-implant disease has a pathogenesis similar to that of periodontal disease, both being triggered by an inflammatory response to the biofilm accumulation. Although the prevalence of peri-implantitis has been evaluated by several clinical studies with different follow-ups, there are currently little data on the impact of implant location and the prevalence of peri-implantitis. The aim of this review, therefore, was to summarize the evidence concerning the prevalence of peri-implantitis in relation to implant location and associated risk predictors. Even though most studies evaluating the prevalence of peri-implantitis in relation to implant location are cross-sectional or retrospective, they suggest that the occurrence of peri-implantitis is most prevalent in the anterior regions of the maxilla and mandible. Moreover, it seems that there is a higher prevalence of peri-implantitis in the maxilla than in the mandible.

Association between cumulative smoking exposure, span since smoking cessation, and peri-implantitis: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the association of cumulative smoking exposure and span since smoking cessation with the occurrence of peri-implantitis. METHODS: A sample of 350 individuals aged ≥ 35 years, with the presence of at least one osseointegrated implant functioning for > 5 years, were enrolled in the study. According to smoking habits, participants were categorized into 3 groups: non-smokers (NS; n = 212), former smokers (FC; n = 66), and current smokers (CS; n = 72). Complete peri-implant and periodontal examinations were evaluated. Associations between the occurrence of peri-implantitis and smoking habits, as well as potential confounders, were evaluated through univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: The occurrence of peri-implantitis in the NS, FS, and CS groups was 18.2%, 19.7%, and 30.5%, respectively. A high prevalence of the overall number of cases with periodontitis (54.2%) was observed in the CS group when compared to the FS and NS groups. After adjusting for confounders, the odds ratio (OR) for the occurrence of peri-implantitis was 2.63 (1.39-6.77; p < 0.001) for CS compared to NS. There was a significant dose-response relationship between pack/year of smoking and the occurrence of peri-implantitis, as well as a significant decrease in the risk as the years of smoking cessation increased. CONCLUSIONS: The occurrence of peri-implantitis among CS was high. The cumulative smoking exposure in an incremental manner and the shorter smoking cessation span was directly associated with a higher risk for peri-implantitis. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Educational and preventive strategies in general health services must attempt to reduce the adverse effects of cumulative smoking exposure and to explore the beneficial effects of smoking cessation on peri-implant status.

Association between liver cirrhosis and peri-implant diseases: a case-control study on implant- and patient-related risk factors.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the potential association between liver cirrhosis and peri-implant diseases, as well as the influence of different risk indicators on this association. METHODS: This case-control study included 64 cases with liver cirrhosis and 128 controls without liver diseases that presented the same socio-demographic and economic profile. The specific inclusion criteria were the following: aged group of 35-55 years and presenting at least one osseointegrated implant functioning for >5 years. A full-mouth peri-implant and periodontal examination was performed and risk variables were recorded. The association between risk variables and the occurrence of peri-implant diseases was tested through univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression, stratified by alcohol status. Additionally, a mediation analysis was performed to examine the mediating effect of age with peri-implantitis. RESULTS: A high prevalence of peri-implantitis (29.7%) was observed among cases when compared to controls (18.0%). Individuals with cirrhosis presented ~2.5 higher chance of having peri-implantitis than controls (p<0.001). Significant variables associated with the occurrence of peri-implantitis in the final logistic model were the following: cirrhosis, alcohol use, age (>55 years), male sex, smoking, periodontitis, and number of ≤14. CONCLUSIONS: An important risk association between liver cirrhosis and peri-implantitis was reported. Future studies with a larger sample size controlling for the patient- and implant-related confounders are needed to better understand the link between peri-implantitis and liver cirrhosis. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Cirrhosis individuals, age, and periodontitis, as well as alcohol use and smoking interaction, should be considered as potential risk indicators for peri-implantitis.

Oral squamous cell carcinoma around dental implants: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to evaluate the epidemiologic profile, screen for possible risk factors, and evaluate the spectrum of clinical characteristics of oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) around dental implants (DIs). METHODS: The systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta- Analyses statement. RESULTS: Thirty-three articles met the eligibility criteria. In total, the sample consisted of 63 patients, and women comprised the majority (55.5%). The mean age of patients was 66.7 years. Oral potentially malignant disorders were reported in 46% of patients, of which 65.5% occurred in women. The most common lesion found in women was oral lichen planus (52.6%). In 88.8% of patients OSCC around DIs occurred in the mandible, and the most common clinical appearance of the lesions was an exophytic mass (46%). Most of these lesions were initially treated as peri-implantitis. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with OSCC around DIs were women without known risk factors. It is important to emphasize that these lesions may present clinical and radiographic features that could resemble peri-implantitis, which can lead to delay in the diagnosis and subsequent treatment.

Prevalência de complicações peri-implantares: mucosite e periimplantite em pacientes tratados em ambiente acadêmico e privado / Prevalence of peri-implant complications: mucositis and peri-implantitis in patients treated in academic and private settings

Introdução: Com a introdução da osseointegração, as reabilitações sobre implantes se tornaram alternativas de tratamento com altas taxas de sucesso. No entanto, complicações de cunho biológico podem acontecer como a mucosite peri-implantar que se não diagnosticada e tratada adequadamente pode evoluir para uma peri-implantite e esta ainda não apresenta recursos terapêuticos previsíveis o que torna a prevenção a melhor estratégia atualmente. Delinear protocolos de manutenção profissional preventiva exige conhecimento quanto aos dados epidemiológicos, tornando necessário estudos transversais para avaliar a frequência e apontar possíveis indicadores de risco. Objetivo: Avaliar a prevalência das doenças peri-implantares e quais são os possíveis fatores de risco em pacientes tratados com implantes osseointegrados. Materiais e Métodos: Estudo transversal de setenta e sete pacientes com trezentos e quarenta e três implantes dentários osseointegrados com pelo menos 1 ano em função, e oriundos das clínicas da Faculdade de Odontologia da Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro e da Clínica privada de implantes Clivo Odontologia, foram avaliados clinica e radiograficamente e classificados quanto as definições de caso do Workshop Mundial de Periodontia de 2017. Uma análise descritiva foi feita para se avaliar a prevalência das complicações. A análise de indicadores de risco para mucosite e peri-implantite a nível de pacientes foi feita por regressão logística binária e a nível de implante a equação de estimativa generalizada foi utilizada. Resultados: Dos 77 indivíduos participantes, 6 (7,8%) apresentaram saúde periimplantar, 4 (5,2%) estabilidade clínica, 35 (45,5%) mucosite e 32 (41,6%) peri-implantite. Do total de 343 implantes analisados, 134 (39,1%) apresentaram saúde peri-implantar, 13 (3,8%) estabilidade clínica, 140 (40,8%) mucosite e 56 (16,3%) peri-implantite. Sangramento à sondagem e plataforma hexágono externo estavam significativamente associados à mucosite. Número aumentado de implantes por paciente, doença periodontal ativa e plataforma hexágono interno apresentaram significância para peri-implantite. A manutenção preventiva não apresentou significância para as desordens biológicas. Conclusão: Os dados encontrados sugerem que as complicações biológicas peri-implantares são condições altamente prevalentes e que podem estar associadas a diversos fatores de risco relacionados tanto ao paciente quanto ao implante, ratificando os dados da literatura. Tais características devem ser levadas em consideração desde as fases iniciais de planejamento a fim de minimizar as complicações biológicas peri-implantares. (AU)

Introduction: With the introduction of osseointegration, implant supported reabilitation became a high success rate treatment alternative. However, biologic complications may occur, like peri-implant mucositis that if under diagnosed and treated may evolve into peri-implantitis, which still does not presentes predictable therapeutic resourses, turning prevention into the best strategy currently. Outlining professional preventive maintenance protocols requires knowledge on epidemiological data, which demands cross-sectional studies to evaluate the frequency and point to risk indicators. Aim: To evaluate the prevalence of peri-implant diseases and factors associated with its occurrence in patients rehabilitated with osseointegrated dental implants according to the proceedings of the 2017 World Workshop on Periodontology. Material and methods: A cross-sectional study of Senventy seven patients with three hundred and forty three osseointegrated dental implants with at least 1 year in function, and from the clinics of both Faculty of Dentistry of Federal University of Rio de Janeiro and the private dental implant clinic Clivo Odontologia, were evaluated clinically and radiographically and classified according to the case definitions of the 2017 World Workshop on Periodontology. A descriptive analyses on the prevalence of the complications was performed. Risk indicators analyses for mucositis and peri-implantitis at patient level were conducted using binary logistic regression and at implant level a generalized estimating equation was conducted. Results: Of the 77 participating individuals, 6 (7,8%) presented peri-implant health, 4 (5,2%) clinical stability, 35 (45,5%) mucositis and 32 (41,6%) periimplantitis. Of the 343 implants analysed, 134 (39,1%) had peri-implant health, 13 (3,8%) clinical stability, 140 (40,8%) mucositis and 56 (16,3%) peri-implantitis. Bleeding on probing and external hexagon plataform were significantly associated with mucositis. Increased number of implants per patient, active periodontal disease and internal hexagon plataforma were significantly associated with peri-implantitis. Preventive maintenance did not present significant association with biologic disorders. Conclusion: These findings suggest that biological peri-implant complications are highly prevalent and might be associated to several risk factors, patient and implant related, ratifying dada from literature. Such characteristics shoud be taken in consideration since early planning stages in order to minimize periimplant biological complications. (AU)

Prevalence of peri-implant diseases - a critical review on the current evidence.

The objective of this paper was to evaluate the current evidence reporting on the prevalence of peri-implantitis and to determine the influencing factors. An electronic search for articles published until February 2019 reporting on the prevalence of peri-implantitis was performed in MEDLINE. Included criteria were published in international peer-reviewed journals, written in English language, reported on the prevalence of peri-implantitis, included implants with a minimum follow-up of one year after functional loading and used a clear definition for peri-implantitis and/or peri-implant mucositis with a clear cutoff for bone level changes according to the case definitions of Sanz and Chapple and Berglundh et al. 2018. Included papers were anaylized for factors affecting the reported prevalences for peri-implantitis. Twenty-five papers were included in the present review and a wide range for the reported prevalence of peri-implantitis was seen. Case definitions for peri-implantitis with various thresholds for bone loss together with the type of reporting on patient- or implant-level were the most significant factors that lead to a large variety of the occurrence of the disease. Additionally, follow-up time and the evaluation in a certain "convenience" population may have influenced the prevalence values. In conclusion, it can be stated that a wide range for reporting the prevalence of peri-implantitis can be found and no real estimation of the global burden of the disease can be made. Applying accurate case definitions for peri-implantitis is the most important factor for reporting the prevalence and should be strictly followed in future reports.

Prevalence of peri-implant diseases - a critical review on the current evidence

Abstract The objective of this paper was to evaluate the current evidence reporting on the prevalence of peri-implantitis and to determine the influencing factors. An electronic search for articles published until February 2019 reporting on the prevalence of peri-implantitis was performed in MEDLINE. Included criteria were published in international peer-reviewed journals, written in English language, reported on the prevalence of peri-implantitis, included implants with a minimum follow-up of one year after functional loading and used a clear definition for peri-implantitis and/or peri-implant mucositis with a clear cutoff for bone level changes according to the case definitions of Sanz and Chapple and Berglundh et al. 2018. Included papers were anaylized for factors affecting the reported prevalences for peri-implantitis. Twenty-five papers were included in the present review and a wide range for the reported prevalence of peri-implantitis was seen. Case definitions for peri-implantitis with various thresholds for bone loss together with the type of reporting on patient- or implant-level were the most significant factors that lead to a large variety of the occurrence of the disease. Additionally, follow-up time and the evaluation in a certain "convenience" population may have influenced the prevalence values. In conclusion, it can be stated that a wide range for reporting the prevalence of peri-implantitis can be found and no real estimation of the global burden of the disease can be made. Applying accurate case definitions for peri-implantitis is the most important factor for reporting the prevalence and should be strictly followed in future reports.

Prevalence, extent and severity of peri-implant diseases. A cross-sectional study based on a university setting in Brazil.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Peri-implant diseases are a growing concern among clinicians. Epidemiological studies following recently recommended case definitions for peri-implant diseases are emerging worldwide. Although a small number of studies on the prevalence of peri-implant diseases has been conducted in Brazil, no information on the extent and severity of the condition has been made available so far. The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence, extent and severity of peri-implant diseases in patients treated in a university setting in Brazil. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with dental implants with at least 1 year in function were clinically and radiographically examined and classified according to recently recommended case definitions. A descriptive analysis on the prevalence, extent and severity of the peri-implant status at patient and implant level was performed. Risk indicators for peri-implantitis were also identified with binary logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the 211 participating individuals, 4 (1.9%) presented peri-implant health, 8 (3.8%) clinical stability, 115 (54.5%) mucositis and 84 (39.8%) peri-implantitis. Of the 748 implants analyzed, 47 (6.3%) presented peri-implant health, 30 (4%) clinical stability, 518 (69.2%) mucositis and 153 (20.5%) peri-implantitis. The extent of implants with peri-implantitis and peri-implant mucositis was 41.5% and 90.4%, respectively. Severe peri-implantitis was found in 36 patients (17.1%) and 67 implants (9%). Gender male, number of implants ≥4, implants installed in the maxilla, cemented prosthesis and keratinized mucosa width <2 mm were significantly associated with the event peri-implantitis. CONCLUSION: In the studied population, the prevalence, extent and severity of the peri-implant diseases were similar to those reported elsewhere. Peri-implant diseases were a common finding, with only 5.7% of patients and 10.3% of implants presenting peri-implant health or clinical stability. About 17% of patients studied presented the severe form of peri-implantitis.

Prevalencia y caracterización de hallazgos asociados con implantes en radiografías panorámicas / Prevalence and characterization of findings associated with implants in panoramic radiographs

Introducción: en Colombia, el último estudio de salud bucal evidenció que cerca del 70 por ciento de la población presenta edentulismo parcial mientras que el 5,2 por ciento habrá perdido todos los dientes entre los 65 y 79 años. La rehabilitación con implantes es una opción cada vez más utilizada, que requiere seguimiento clínico y radiográfico, siendo la radiografía panorámica una opción de bajo costo, en la que es posible observar zonas de pérdida ósea, angulación mesodistal del implante, relación con estructuras anatómicas y lesiones sugerentes de periimplantitis. Se requieren reportes y análisis de datos relevantes sobre los hallazgos en radiografías asociados a implantes dentales para determinar los factores de riesgo para su éxito, en los pacientes que los usan. Objetivo: determinar la prevalencia y caracterizar los hallazgos asociados a los implantes de oseointegración en radiografías panorámicas. Métodos: se realizó un estudio observacional descriptivo de corte transversal, con 10 000 radiografías panorámicas digitales seleccionadas por conveniencia de centros radiológicos en la ciudad de Bogotá, Colombia, de las cuales 543 correspondieron a la muestra analizada por la presencia de implantes. Se evaluó para cada implante: localización, posición, angulación y distancias con las estructuras adyacentes, utilizando el programa Clínicalview® (Orthopantomograph OP200D, Instrumentarium, USA). Resultados: La frecuencia de radiografías con implantes fue del 5,43 por ciento con un total de 1 791 implantes, con un promedio 3,2 por radiografía. Se encontraron en mayor proporción en el maxilar superior con una localización supracrestal y una angulación de 10,3 grados. El 32 por ciento presentaba distancias implante/diente o implante/implante inferiores a las óptimas. El 40,9 por ciento estaban restaurados y 1,2 por ciento mostraban lesiones compatibles con periimplantitis. Conclusiones: un alto porcentaje de los implantes revisados tiene un factor de riesgo que afecta su viabilidad a largo plazo ya sea por angulación, posición supracrestal o crestal, vecindad con dientes u otros implantes o bien por no ser restaurable(AU)

Introduction: the most recent survey about oral health conducted in Colombia revealed that nearly 70 percent of the population is partially edentulous, whereas 5.2 percent will have lost all their teeth by the time they are 65-79 years old. Implant rehabilitation is an ever more common alternative which requires clinical and radiographic follow-up, panoramic radiography being a low-cost option to observe areas of bone loss, mesiodistal angulation of the implant, relationship to anatomical structures and lesions suggesting peri-implantitis. Relevant data analyses and reports are needed about radiographic findings associated with dental implants to determine the risk factors for their success in patients wearing them. Objective: determine the prevalence of and characterize the findings associated to osseointegration implants in panoramic radiographs. Methods: a cross-sectional observational descriptive study was conducted of 10 000 digital panoramic radiographs chosen by convenience sampling at radiology centers from the city of Bogotá, Colombia, of which 543 made up the study sample, due to the presence of implants. Each implant was evaluated for location, position, angulation and distance from adjacent structures, using the software Clínicalview® (Orthopantomograph OP200D, Instrumentarium, USA). Results: the frequency of radiographs with implants was 5.43 percent with a total 1 791 implants and an average 3.2 per radiograph. Implants were more common on the upper maxilla with a supracrestal location and an angulation of 10.3 degrees. In 32 percent implant-tooth or implant-implant distances were below optimum values. 40.9 percent had been restored and 1.2 percent showed lesions compatible with peri-implantitis. Conclusions: a large proportion of the implants examined exhibit a risk factor affecting their long-term viability, namely angulation, supracrestal or crestal position, proximity to teeth or other implants, or not being restorable(AU)

Frequency of peri-implant diseases and associated factors.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the frequency of peri-implant diseases and factors associated with its occurrence. MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred and fifty-five patients with dental implants were evaluated in this cross-sectional study. Dental implants were clinically and radiographically evaluated to diagnose their peri-implant condition, according to Mombelli (Proceedings of the 3rd European Workshop on Periodontology, 1999, Quintessence, London). Associations between peri-implant diseases and independent variables (socioeconomic, demographic and periodontal characteristics) were evaluated through bivariate analysis with chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests, as well as by multiple logistic regression. The significance level was set at 5%. RESULTS: The frequencies of the peri-implant diseases, mucositis and peri-implantitis, in individuals were 54% and 28% (CI, 95%), respectively. The sample was almost exclusively of patients with untreated periodontal disease (93%). Bivariate analysis showed that these peri-implant diseases were associated with male patients (prevalence ratio [PR], 3.38), medication use (PR, 2.94), systemic diseases (PR, 2.25), number of implants (PR, 2.53), visible plaque index (PR, 2.49) and gingival index (PR, 2.70). Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that medication use (prevalence ratio adjusted [PRadj], 1.23; 95% CI: 1.04-1.46; P = 0.017), having two or more implants (PRadj, 1.22; 95% CI: 1.02-1.46; P = 0.029) and gingival bleeding index > 10% (PRadj, 1.22; 95% CI: 1.03-1.44; P = 0.022) were associated with the presence of peri-implant disease. CONCLUSION: Peri-implant diseases were diagnosed in 54% of patients; gingival index of greater than 10%, having more than two implants and use of medication were associated with the frequency of peri-implant disease.

Prevalence of peri-implant disease on platform switching implants: a cross-sectional pilot study.

The objective of this study was to assess the prevalence of mucositis and peri-implantitis associated with the use of two types of implants-conventional versus platform switching after one year of loading. A longitudinal study of 64 implants in 25 patients was performed. Clinical variables, such as clinical pocket depth and bleeding upon probing, plaque, mobility, gingival recession, clinical attachment loss, and radiographic bone loss, were analyzed. The case definition for peri-implantitis was established as pockets of ≥ 5 mm with bleeding and bone loss ≥ 2 mm. One year after implant loading, the prevalence of mucositis and peri-implantitis with conventional implants (CIs) was 81.2% and 15.6%, respectively. For platform switching implants (PSIs) the prevalence was 90% and 6.6%, respectively. These differences were not statistically significant (p = 0.5375). However, there was a trend towards a lower prevalence of peri-implantitis with platform switching Implants.

Doença peri-implantar follow-up microbiológico de 5 anos e revisão sistemática com meta-análise / Peri-implant disease: Microbiological 5-year follow-up and systematic review with meta-analysis

Objetivos: Avaliar, em um estudo longitudinal de 5 anos, a associação entre o diagnóstico da doença peri-implantar (DPi) e a contagem de patógenos na presença e ausência de terapia de manutenção periodontal/peri-implantar (TMPP). Realizar uma revisão sistemática de estudos observacionais para avaliar se dados presentes na literatura indicam uma maior prevalência de peri-implantite (PI) em indivíduos com diagnóstico ou histórico de periodontite (PE). Métodos: O estudo longitudinal microbiológico foi realizado avaliando-se, através da técnica da reação em cadeia da polimerase em tempo real, as seguintes espécies bacterianas: T. forsythia, T. denticola, P. gingivalis, P. intermedia, F. nucleatum e A. naeslundii em 80 indivíduos com mucosite peri-implantar (MP) que realizavam consultas para manutenção periodontal/peri-implantar regular (GTP, n = 39) comparados aos que não realizavam (GNTP, n = 41). Para a revisão sistemática uma busca eletrônica foi conduzida até março de 2016. Foram encontrados 1330 estudos, 17 artigos foram incluídos na análise final (PROSPERO CRD42015009518). A meta-análise foi realizada para presença ou ausência de PI. Medidas de efeito sumário e taxas de razão de chances (OR) com 95% IC foram calculadas. Resultados: Os resultados do estudo longitudinal mostraram que, após 5 anos, houve uma diminuição da carga bacteriana total (CBT), na frequência das bactérias analisadas do complexo laranja (p = 0.013) e nas frequências isoladas de T. forsythia (p = 0.000), P. gingivalis (p = 0.003) e P. intermedia (p = 0.013) no GTP. Indivíduos com PI apresentaram maiores frequências de P. gingivalis (GNTP: p = 0,030; GTP: p = 0,000), T. denticola (GNTP: p = 0,017) e F. nucleatum (GTP e GNTP; p = 0.002) comparados aos com MP. Indivíduos que desenvolveram PI apresentaram um aumento na CBT (GTP: p = 0.047; GNTP: p = 0,055) e na frequência isolada de P. gingivalis (GNTP: p = 0,002) e F. nucleatum (GTP e GNTP; p = 0.000). Não houve diferenças estatisticamente significativas intergrupos em relação aos patógenos do complexo vermelho (p > 0,05). Tanto nos indivíduos com MP (T1 e T2: p = 0,000), quanto nos indivíduos com PI (T2: p = 0,000), a frequência do complexo laranja foi significativamente menor no GTP. A meta-análise dos estudos coorte mostrou que indivíduos (OR = 7.22), e implantes (OR = 5.63) apresentaram maior risco de desenvolver PI. Nos estudos transversais, em análises não ajustadas, indivíduos com PE apresentaram maior chance de ter PI (OR = 3.18). Quando a análise foi ajustada para tabagismo e diabetes não houve aumento estatisticamente significativo no risco para PI (OR = 1.73; IC 95% 0.86- 3.45). Conclusões: Pôde-se concluir que a ausência de consultas regulares para manutenção periodontal/peri-implantar foi associada com pior condição clínica periimplantar, maior incidência de PI e um aumento significativo na CBT. Adicionalmente, indivíduos com diagnóstico de PI apresentaram maiores frequências de P. gingivalis, T. denticola e F. nucleatum e maior CBT. A revisão sistemática permitiu concluir que indivíduos com diagnóstico ou histórico de PE podem apresentar um risco aumentado para PI. Mais estudos prospectivos são necessários para confirmar a evidência, principalmente os ensaios clínicos controlados randomizados

Aims: Evaluate, in a 5-year longitudinal study, the association between peri-implant disease's (DPi) diagnosis and the count of pathogens in the presence and absence of periodontal/peri-implant maintenance therapy. Conduct a systematic review of observational studies to evaluate whether data in the literature indicates a higher prevalence of peri-implantitis (PI) in subjects with diagnosis or history of periodontitis (PE). Methods: the microbiologic study was performed evaluating, through polymerase chain reaction in real time technique, the following bacterial species: T. forsythia, T. denticola, P. gingivalis, P. intermedia, F. nucleatum and A. naeslundii in 80 patients with peri-implant mucositis (PM) that were queries for periodontal/periimplant regular maintenance (GTP, n = 39) compared to those who were not (GNTP, n = 41). For the systematic review an electronic search was conducted until March 2016. It was found 1330 studies, 19 articles were included in the final analysis (PROSPERO CRD42015009518). The meta-analysis was performed for presence or absence of PI. Summary measures and odds ratio (OR) with 95% IC were calculated. Results: the results of the longitudinal study showed that, after 5 years, there was a decrease in the total bacterial load (TBL), the frequency of bacteria analyzed in the orange complex (p = 0.013) and in the frequencies of T. forsythia (p = 0.000), P. gingivalis (p = 0.003) and P. intermedia (p = 0.013) in the GTP. Individuals with PI had higher frequencies of P. gingivalis (GNTP: p = 0.030; GTP: p = 0.000), T. denticola (GNTP: p = 0.017) and T. nucleatum (GTP and GNTP; p = 0.002) compared to those with PM diagnosis. Individuals who have developed PI showed an increase in TBL (GTP: p = 0047; GNTP: p = 0.055) and in the isolated frequencies of P. gingivalis (GNTP: p = 0.002) and F. nucleatum (GTP and GNTP; p = 0.000). There were no statistically significant differences intergroups in relation to red complex pathogens (p > 0.05). Both in individuals with PM (T1 and T2: p = 0.000), as in individuals with PI (T2: p = 0.000), the frequency of orange complex was significantly lower in the GTP. The meta-analysis of cohort studies showed that individuals (OR = 7.22), and implants (OR = 5.63) presented a higher risk of developing PI. In the cross-sectional studies, in unadjusted analyses, individuals with PE presented a higher chance of having PI (OR = 3.18). When the analysis was adjusted for smoking and diabetes, there was no statistically significant increase in risk for PI (OR = 1.73; 95% CI 0.86-3.45). Conclusions: it might be concluded that the absence of regular periodontal/peri-implant maintenance was associated with worse peri-implant clinical condition, higher incidence of PI and a significant increase in TBL. Additionally, individuals diagnosed with PI showed greater frequencies of P. gingivalis, T. denticola and F. nucleatum and largest TBL. The systematic review showed that individuals diagnosed or with PE's history may have an increased risk for PI. More prospective studies are needed to confirm this evidence, especially the randomized controlled clinical trials

Prevalence of peri-implant disease on platform switching implants: a cross-sectional pilot study

The objective of this study was to assess the prevalence of mucositis and peri-implantitis associated with the use of two types of implants—conventional versus platform switching after one year of loading. A longitudinal study of 64 implants in 25 patients was performed. Clinical variables, such as clinical pocket depth and bleeding upon probing, plaque, mobility, gingival recession, clinical attachment loss, and radiographic bone loss, were analyzed. The case definition for peri-implantitis was established as pockets of ≥ 5 mm with bleeding and bone loss ≥ 2 mm. One year after implant loading, the prevalence of mucositis and peri-implantitis with conventional implants (CIs) was 81.2% and 15.6%, respectively. For platform switching implants (PSIs) the prevalence was 90% and 6.6%, respectively. These differences were not statistically significant (p = 0.5375). However, there was a trend towards a lower prevalence of peri-implantitis with platform switching Implants.

Prevalence and Possible Risk Factors of Peri-implantitis: A Concept Review.

AIM: The purpose of this review is to estimate the prevalence of peri-implantitis, as well as to determine possible risk factors associated with its development in patients treated with oral implants. BACKGROUND: Although implant therapy has been identified as a successful and predictable treatment for partially and fully edentulous patients, complications and failures can occur. Peri-implantitis is considered a biologic complication that results in bone loss around implants and may lead to implant treatment failure. RESULTS: A great variation has been observed in the literature regarding the prevalence of peri-implantitis according to the diagnostic criteria used to define peri-implantitis. The prevalence ranges from 4.7 to 43% at implant level, and from 8.9 to > 56% at patient level. Many risk factors that may lead to the establishment and progression of peri-implantitis have been suggested. There is strong evidence that presence and history of periodontitis are potential risk factors for peri-implantitis. Cigarette smoking has not yet been conclusively established as a risk factor for peri-implantitis, although extra care should be taken with dental implant in smokers. Other risk factors, such as diabetes, genetic traits, implant surface roughness and presence of keratinized mucosa still require further investigation. CONCLUSION: Peri-implantitis is not an uncommon complication following implant therapy. A higher prevalence of peri-implantitis has been identified for patients with presence or history of periodontal disease and for smokers. Until now, a true risk factor for peri-implantitis has not been established. Supportive maintenance program is essential for the long-term success of treatments with oral implants. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The knowledge of the real impact of peri-implantitis on the outcome of treatments with oral implants as well as the identification of risk factors associated to this inflammatory condition are essential for the development of supportive maintenance programs and the establishment of prevention protocols.

Prevalence of Peri-implant Diseases: Analyses of Associated Factors.

UNLABELLED: AIM. Identify the relationship between specific factors (age, sex, smoking, time of prosthesis in function, implant location, and width of peri-implant keratinized mucosa) and peri-implant diseases in patients from the Center of Research and Continuing Education in Implant Dentistry (CEPID) at the Federal University of Santa Catarina (UFSC), Brazil. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in 193 patients that had received 725 external-hexed cylindrical implants supporting functional prosthesis for at least 1 year (range from 1-9 years). Clinical examination included probing depths, bleeding on probing and/or suppuration. Radiographic exam was conducted to measure peri-implant bone levels. RESULTS: There was no statistically significance in the association between prevalence of peri-implant diseases and age, sex, time with prostheses in function and implant location variables independently. There was a statistically significant association between the independent variables of smoking and the width of keratinized peri-implant mucosa less than 2mm, and the presence of peri-implant diseases. When all the categories were evaluated together in relation with the peri-implant diseases, the prostheses in function for 5 years and more had association with presence of both, peri-implant mucositis an peri-implantitis. Peri-implantitis prevalence was higher for males with the prostheses in use for 5 years or more. Peri-implant mucositis was more associated with the participants over 57 years of age, with systemic disease and with the prostheses in function for more than 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Smoking habits and the width of peri-implant keratinized mucosa as independent variables were associated with the prevalence of peri-implant diseases.

Prevalence of peri-implantitis in patients with implant-supported fixed prostheses.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate periimplantitis prevalence in patients using implant-supported fixed prostheses that did not have any routine maintenance care. METHOD AND MATERIALS: A total of 161 implants (27 patients) were evaluated in patients using implant-supported fixed prostheses. Collected data included information related to patient general health and local factors such as characteristics of implants, time in function, type of loading, positioning, Modified Bleeding Index, bacterial plaque, bleeding on probing (BOP), marginal recession, probing depth (PD), keratinized mucosa, and radiographic bone loss (BL). Factors related to the prostheses were also evaluated. The exclusion criteria were patients that have had any follow-up visit for plaque control of the prosthesis and/or the implants. RESULTS: From a total of 161 implants, 116 (72%) presented without peri-implantitis (PD > 4 mm + BOP + BL > 2 mm) while 45 (28%) had some sign of the disease. Implants placed in the maxilla were 2.98 times more likely to develop the disease (P < .05). Moreover, patients aged ≤ 60 years old were 3.24 times more likely to develop peri-implantitis (P < .05). Another analysis with statistical relevance (P < .05) was that implants with less than 3 mm interimplant distance were three times more likely to have peri-implantitis. There was no statistical relevance considering other analyses. CONCLUSION: It can be concluded that patients aged ≤ 60 years have a greater chance of presenting periimplantitis, as well as for implants positioned in the maxilla and those placed with an interimplant distance < 3 mm.