Surface Topography Has Less Influence on Peri-Implantitis than Patient Factors: A Comparative Clinical Study of Two Dental Implant Systems.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to assess the risk of peri-implantitis (PI) onset among different implant systems and evaluate the severity of the disease from a population of patients treated in a university clinic. Furthermore, this study intends to thoroughly examine the surface properties of the implant systems that have been identified and investigated. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data from a total of six hundred and 14 patients were extracted from the Institute of Clinical Dentistry, Dental Faculty, University of Oslo. Subject- and implant-based variables were collected, including the type of implant, date of implant installation, medical records, recall appointments up to 2022, periodontal measurements, information on diabetes, smoking status, sex, and age. The outcome of interest was the diagnosis of PI, defined as the occurrence of bleeding on probing (BoP), peri-implant probing depth (PD) ≥ 5 mm, and bone loss (BL). Data were analyzed using multivariate linear and logistic regression. Scanning electron microscopy, light laser profilometer, and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy were utilized for surface and chemical analyses. RESULTS: Among the patients evaluated, 6.8% were diagnosed with PI. A comparison was made between two different implant systems: Dentsply Sirona, OsseospeedTM and Straumann SLActive, with mean follow-up times of 3.84 years (SE: 0.15) and 3.34 years (SE: 0.15), respectively. The surfaces have different topographies and surface chemistry. However, no significant association was found between PI and implant surface/system, including no difference in the onset or severity of the disease. Nonetheless, plaque control was associated with an increased risk of developing PI, along with the gender of the patient. Furthermore, patients suffering from PI exhibited increased BL in the anterior region. CONCLUSION: No differences were observed among the evaluated implant systems, although the surfaces have different topography and chemistry. Factors that affected the risk of developing PI were plaque index and male gender. The severity of BL in patients with PI was more pronounced in the anterior region. Consequently, our findings show that success in implantology is less contingent on selecting implant systems and more on a better understanding of patient-specific risk factors, as well as on implementing biomaterials that can more effectively debride dental implants.

Experimental Model of Ligature-Induced Peri-Implantitis in Mice.

Dental implants have a high success and survival rate. However, complications such as peri-implantitis (PI) are highly challenging to treat. PI is characterized by inflammation in the tissues around dental implants with progressive loss of supporting bone. To optimize dental implants' longevity in terms of health and functionality, it is crucial to understand the peri-implantitis pathophysiology. In this regard, using mouse models in research has proven clear benefits in recreating clinical circumstances. This study aimed to describe an experimental model of ligature-induced peri-implantitis in mice and determine whether there is effectiveness in inducing this disease, given the observed bone and tissue changes. The experimental peri-implantitis induction comprehends the following steps: teeth extraction, implant placement, and ligature-inducted PI. A sample of eighteen 3-week-old C57BL/6J male mice was divided into two groups, ligature (N=9) and control non-ligature (N=9). The evaluation of clinical, radiographical, and histological factors was performed. The ligature group showed significantly higher bone loss, increased soft tissue edema, and apical epithelial migration than the non-ligature group. It was concluded that this pre-clinical model can successfully induce peri-implantitis in mice.

Patient-, implant- and prosthetic-related factors on peri-implant mucositis and bone loss.

Peri-implant diseases, including peri-implant mucositis (PIM) and peri-implantitis, are a chronic inflammatory disorder triggered by bacterial biofilm in susceptible hosts. Potential risk factors for peri-implant diseases include smoking, dental plaque accumulation, poor oral hygiene, genetics, and absence of peri-implant keratinized mucosa. This cohort study aimed to evaluate the influence of patient-, implant-, and prosthetic-related factors on PIM and peri-implant bone loss (PBL) around dental implants after 1 year of loading. A total of 54 subjects (22 males and 32 females) were included in the study. Peri-implant clinical parameters were assessed and standardized periapical radiographs of each dental implant were obtained 15 days after the definitive prosthesis installation (baseline) and at 3, 6, and 12 months of follow-up. A total of 173 implants were evaluated. PIM affected 44.8% of the implants and no significant association was found between the investigated parameters and PIM incidence, except for type of implant connection. A significantly higher incidence of PIM (80.0%) was observed for implants with internal hexagon connection type after 1 year of follow-up (p = 0.015). Moreover, a mean PBL of 0.35 ± 1.89 mm was observed and no dental implant was affected by peri-implantitis after 1 year of function. No specific influence of patient, implant, or prosthetic factors on PBL was observed. No association was found between the occurrence of PIM/PBL and the patient-, implant-, and prosthetic-related factors investigated in this cohort study, except for the type of dental-implant connection.

Ultrastructural and immunohistochemical evaluation of hyperplastic soft tissues surrounding dental implants in fibular jaws.

In reconstructive surgery, complications post-fibula free flap (FFF) reconstruction, notably peri-implant hyperplasia, are significant yet understudied. This study analyzed peri-implant hyperplastic tissue surrounding FFF, alongside peri-implantitis and foreign body granulation (FBG) tissues from patients treated at the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Seoul National University Dental Hospital. Using light microscopy, pseudoepitheliomatous hyperplasia, anucleate and pyknotic prickle cells, and excessive collagen deposition were observed in FFF hyperplastic tissue. Ultrastructural analyses revealed abnormal structures, including hemidesmosome dilation, bacterial invasion, and endoplasmic reticulum (ER) swelling. In immunohistochemical analysis, unfolded protein-response markers ATF6, PERK, XBP1, inflammatory marker NFκB, necroptosis marker MLKL, apoptosis marker GADD153, autophagy marker LC3, epithelial-mesenchymal transition, and angiogenesis markers were expressed variably in hyperplastic tissue surrounding FFF implants, peri-implantitis, and FBG tissues. NFκB expression was higher in peri-implantitis and FBG tissues compared to hyperplastic tissue surrounding FFF implants. PERK expression exceeded XBP1 significantly in FFF hyperplastic tissue, while expression levels of PERK, XBP1, and ATF6 were not significantly different in peri-implantitis and FBG tissues. These findings provide valuable insights into the interconnected roles of ER stress, necroptosis, apoptosis, and angiogenesis in the pathogenesis of oral pathologies, offering a foundation for innovative strategies in dental implant rehabilitation management and prevention.

Maintenance of peri-implant health in general dental practice.

The long-term maintenance or restoration of peri-implant tissues' health depends on the strategic implementation of preventive measures and interventions. These measures should be initiated before implant placement and continued throughout a patient's lifetime, as part of a tailored and comprehensive supportive peri-implant care (SPIC) programme. Central to the clinical efforts of maintaining and rehabilitating peri-implant tissues are several key factors, including the ongoing assessment and frequent monitoring of tissue health and stability, proactive oral health promotion, the control of risk factors and indicators and the provision of professional plaque biofilm removal. It is of paramount importance to underline that SPIC should not limit its scope exclusively to patients already in a state of peri-implant health; in fact, it is imperative that it should extend its protective effect to individuals who have been previously diagnosed and treated for peri-implant diseases, focusing on preventing its recurrence and progression, thereby avoiding further complications, such as implant loss.This narrative review presents an overview of the current literature on the maintenance of peri-implant tissues' health and the steps of SPIC providing insights into the critical factors to be considered when managing dental implant patients in the general dental practice.

Risk factors for Peri-implantitis: An umbrella review of meta-analyses of observational studies and assessment of biases.

OBJECTIVES: To perform a comprehensive quantitative and qualitative analysis of the findings from previously published meta-analyses and to assess existing biases. DATA/SOURCES: A search was conducted for meta-analyses of observational studies investigating the association between any risk factor and peri­implantitis in PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Epistemonikos, from inception until October 2023 (PROSPERO: CRD42024512408). STUDY SELECTION: From a total of 5002 publications, 51 full-text articles were evaluated for eligibility, and 12 articles that described 41 unique meta-analyses evaluating the association between risk factors and periimplantitis were selected. Among 41 associations, 24 associations were significant. None of the associations were graded as convincing evidence. Two associations, presence of periodontitis (OR = 3.84 [95 % CI 2.58,5.72]) and cigarette smoking (RR=2.07 [95 % CI 1.41,3.04]) were graded as highly suggestive. Eight associations, diabetes mellitus, hyperglycaemia, lack of prophylaxis, history of chronic periodontal disease, ongoing or history of periodontal disease, implants located in the anterior region of the jaw (maxillary and mandibular), osteoprotegerin (OPG) gene polymorphisms, and lack of keratinized mucosal width were graded as suggestive evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Periodontitis and cigarette smoking are highly suggestive risk factors for peri­implantitis. The remaining risk factors which are suggestive require more high-quality studies to be performed to upgrade the level of evidence. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The highly suggestive and suggestive risk factors for peri­implantitis summarized in this umbrella review should be rigorously assessed, monitored and managed by clinicians to reduce the risk peri­implantitis, as well as to form part of the preoperative consent process.

ISQ as a Diagnostic Tool in Implants Affected with Bone Loss: An In Vitro Experimental Study.

PURPOSE: To determine the relationship between bone loss that occurs during the peri-implantitis process and variations in implant stability using resonance frequency analysis (RFA) measurement methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty selftapping implants were placed in cow ribs, and study scenarios were established according to the affected implant side and bone loss depth (n = 10 implants per group): Case 1 = bone loss on one side (vestibular); Case 2 = bone loss on two opposite sides (buccal and lingual); Case 3 = bone loss on two adjacent sides (buccal and mesial); and Case 4 = foursided bone loss (circumferential). For each group of 10 implants, first a bone loss of 0 mm was evaluated, then 4-mm defects (simulating 1/3 of bone loss) were created and evaluated, and finally 8-mm defects (simulating 2/3 of bone loss) were created and evaluated. Osteotomy measurements were made with a periodontal probe. For each implant, RFA was measured by the same operator using the Beacon system (Osstell). RESULTS: The initial implant stability quotient (ISQ) values of the 40 implants exceeded 70, reflecting an average of 73 in the buccolingual (VL) and 74.8 in the mesiodistal (MD) directions. ISQ measurements in the 10 implants in which bone dehiscence was performed on the vestibular aspect reflected a decrease in ISQ values as bone loss increased. When generating bone loss in two opposite sides (buccal and lingual), a greater decrease in ISQ values was observed when 2/3 of the implant were affected. The average VL ISQ measurement was less than 70 when at sites with 2/3 of bone loss. CONCLUSIONS: When bone loss occurs on only one side of the implant, the ISQ values decrease, but the implant maintains good stability. The same occurs when two opposite sides of the implant are affected, as the unaffected side has the least decrease in ISQ value.

Prosthetic design and choice of components for maintenance of optimal peri-implant health: a comprehensive review.

Current research has identified features of the prosthetic design with potential to significantly impact the long-term health of peri-implant tissues, while the choice of prosthetic components is also shown to be critical in an effort to reduce long-term complications of implant therapy. Overcontouring of the prosthesis emergence profile has been associated with marginal bone loss, recession and peri-implantitis, while the mucosal emergence angle is shown to have a strong association with peri-implant tissue inflammation. Further elements of interest include convexity/concavity of the restoration, the prosthetic connection and the different geometric configurations of junctions, as well as the peri-implant tissue dimensions. With regards to implant components, the choice between original and third-party-manufactured components might come with implications, as differences in material and microgeometry might impact precision of fit and overall performance, potentially leading to complications. Scrutiny of the specifications and manufacturing is essential when third-party-manufactured components are considered.The aim of this narrative review was to summarise the current evidence with regards to the restorative features of the implant prosthesis and also the selection of prosthetic components which can have implications for the long-term success of the implant therapy. Furthermore, the review aimed at interpretating current scientific evidence into meaningful strategies and recommendations to implement in clinical practice of implant dentistry.

Peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis: key features and differences.

Peri-implant diseases are frequent complications that occur around osseointegrated endosseous implants and are the result of an imbalance between the bacterial challenge and host response. Peri-implant diseases may affect the peri-implant mucosa only (peri-implant mucositis) or also involve the supporting bone (peri-implantitis). Early detection of peri-implant diseases and timely treatment is important for the success of dental implant treatment. Peri-implant probing is essential to assess the peri-implant health status and should be done at each recall visit. Dental practitioners should be familiar with the clinical and radiological features of both conditions in order to make an accurate diagnosis and determine the appropriate treatment required. This article aims to provide clinicians with an understanding of the key differences between peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis.

An introduction to dental implants.

The use of implants to replace missing teeth is now commonplace and practised by clinicians worldwide in both general and specialist practice. There is an abundance of evidence on the general success of implant treatment. As well as reviewing the history of dental implants, this narrative review will discuss the merits and successful placement of tissue-level verses bone-level implants. Furthermore, the article will evaluate the concept and benefits of platform switching for implant treatment. Finally, with the increased placement of implants, this narrative paper will review how different titanium surfaces impact on the risk of peri-implantitis.

Local risk factors for one-year dental implant loss and late loss in 287 failed implants caused by peri-implantitis or infection after prosthesis loading: a retrospective study.

The purpose of this paper was to retrospectively assess the local factors that are likely to be associated with the risks for one-year dental implant loss.A retrospective study was designed and implemented. The sample consisted of patients who underwent an implant loss or removal caused by peri-implantitis or infection after prosthesis loading. The chi-squared test and generalised estimating equations (GEE) were used to explore the potential risk factors for one-year implant loss. A total of 279 patients with 287 failed implants were enrolled in this study. Immediate implant placement exhibited a 3.373 (95% CI: 1.652 to 6.886) significantly increased risk to experience one-year implant loss than early and late implant placement (p = 0.001). In addition, implants loaded during a healing period fewer than two months after implant placement were at 18.139 (95% CI: 8.925 to 36.866) significantly higher risk of one-year implant loss when compared with those that loaded within more than two months after implant placement (p < 0.001). Smokers were 1.866 (OR = 1.866,95% CI: 0.993 to 3.510) times as high risk for one-year implant loss as non-smokers, but there were no significant statistical differences (p = 0.053). Immediate implant placement and early implant loading were considered risk factors for one-year implant loss.

History of periodontitis as a risk factor for implant failure and incidence of peri-implantitis: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis of prospective cohort studies.

INTRODUCTION: Dental implants are widely employed as dependable replacements for lost teeth. However, it is crucial to establish, solely through prospective cohort studies, whether a history of periodontitis indeed constitutes a significant risk factor for implant failure. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in October 2022 in several electronic databases with subsequent manual updates. Only original prospective cohort studies evaluating the implant (loss) rate ≥1 year after implant loading were included. Logarithmic risk ratio and weighted mean differences were calculated. Study results were summarized using random effects meta-analyses evaluated by trial sequential analyses. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale evaluated study bias and the GRADE approach assessed the certainty/quality of the evidence. RESULTS: A total of 14 publications reporting on 12 prospective cohort studies were included. Low evidence certainty/quality evidence due to the absence of randomized clinical trials revealed significantly greater odds of failure in patients with a history of periodontitis at follow-ups both after ≤5 years (RR = 1.62; 95% CI: 1.71-2.37; p = 0.013) and >5 years (RR = 2.26; 95% CI: 1.12-4.53; p = 0.023). The incidence of peri-implantitis (RR = 4.09; 95% CI: 1.93-8.58; p < 0.001) and the weighted mean (WM) of marginal bone loss (WM difference = 0.75 mm; 95% CI: 0.18-1.31; p < 0.05) were statistically significantly greater in the periodontally compromised group, whereas there was no significant difference between the two groups for peri-implant probing depth. CONCLUSION: A history of periodontitis can be considered a significant risk factor for incident implant failure, peri-implantitis, and greater marginal bone loss.

Prediabetes and poorly controlled type-2 diabetes as risk indicators for peri-implant diseases:A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The study answers the PECO question: "In adults with dental implants (P), do subjects suffering from type-2 diabetes or prediabetes (E) have worse peri-implant conditions (O) than subjects without type-2 diabetes and prediabetes (C)?". Prediabetes (5.7-6.4 % HbA1c), and the different qualities of glycemic control in type-2 diabetes; well-controlled (>8 % HbA1c), and poorly controlled (>8 % HbA1c) individuals; were classified according to the recommendations of the American Diabetes Association. DATA: Predefined search keys were used with search terms including: Dental implant, diabetes mellitus, glycemic control and HbA1c. SOURCES: An electronic search in the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane libraries were conducted without any filters or language restrictions. Additionally, manual search of the reference lists were carried out to identify all relevant articles. STUDY SELECTION: Eligibility criteria were cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies that answerd our PECO question with at least 1 year of follow-up. From a total of 2660 records, 35 articles (1761 individuals) were included in the analysis. Meta-analytic difference in means for crestal bone loss was 1.2 mm [95 % CI=0.4; 2.1] in patients with prediabetes, 1.8 mm [CI=1.0; 2.7] in poorly controlled patients, whereas 0.4 mm [CI=-0.3; 1.1] in well-controlled individuals. Meta-regression showed that 1 % increase in HbA1c increased crestal bone loss by 0.24 mm. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of the study, patients with poorly controlled type-2 diabetes or prediabetes may have worse peri-implant conditions compared to patients without diabetes and well-controlled type-2 diabetes. Well-controlled type-2 diabetes is not a risk indicator for peri-implant diseases. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Clinicians should measure blood HbA1c levels when planning implant-supported restorations, thus patients with undiagnosed or poorly controlled type-2 diabetes can be identified, that allows for glycemic level adjustment prior to dental implant surgery, ensuring peri-implant health. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER: (CRD42022375263).

Relationship Between Diabetes Mellitus and Periodontal/Peri-Implant Disease: A Contemporaneous Review.

The prevalence of diabetes mellitus (DM), a major chronic disease and a leading cause of death and disability around the world, is rising. According to the latest data, the global prevalence of DM has increased to 463 million (9.3% of adults) in 2019 and is estimated to reach 700 million by 2045. Periodontal disease, result of periodontium inflammation, is a common, chronic disease and has long been considered one of the complications of DM. Moreover, literature reflects a spectrum of conflicting viewpoints on the effect of diabetic conditions on the implant treatment strategies. The current review aims to update the recent epidemiologic evidence regarding the relationship between DM and periodontal/peri-implant disease, emphasising the effects of glycaemic control on the severity of these diseases and describing the pathobiological mechanisms underlying this association. This review's findings indicate a bidirectional relationship between DM and periodontal/peri-implant disease and that this relationship seems causal, implying that controlling these two diseases might help prevent each other's incidence. Additionally, the severity of periodontal/peri-implant disease is directly related to metabolic control. Although patients with diabetes can obtain implant success similar to those in systemically healthy individuals, an increased risk of peri-implantitis has been reported in DM patients. Therefore, the importance of glycaemic control and maintaining proper oral hygiene cannot be overstated.

Peri-implantitis in patients without regular supportive therapy: Prevalence and risk indicators.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of peri-implant diseases in patients treated in a university setting without a regular peri-implant supportive therapy schedule, and to identify the risk indicators associated with peri-implantitis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was made of patients with dental implants with at least 12 months of functional loading who did not receive regular peri-implant supportive therapy. Patient- and implant-related variables were retrieved, and clinical and radiological examinations were performed. Descriptive and bivariate analyses and multilevel logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with peri-implantitis. RESULTS: A total of 213 implants in 88 patients were analyzed. The patient-level prevalence of peri-implantitis and peri-implant mucositis was 26.1% (95%CI: 16.7%-35.5%) and 44.3% (95%CI: 34.0%-54.6%), respectively. Peri-implant diseases were significantly more frequent when the width of the keratinized mucosa was < 2 mm (OR = 5.26; 95%CI: 1.24-22.26; p = 0.024), and when there was 12 month post-loading bone loss (OR = 2.96; 95%CI: 1.35-6.52; p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Peri-implantitis is a common finding in patients without regular peri-implant supportive therapy (prevalence 16.7-35.5%). A thin peri-implant keratinized mucosa (< 2 mm) and a higher degree of bone remodeling after loading seem to be the main risk factors for peri-implantitis in this patient profile. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Patients who do not engage in supportive peri-implant maintenance have a higher risk of peri-implantitis. A thin keratinized mucosa and bone loss during the first year of loading are predisposing factors for peri-implantitis.

Peri-implant Tissue Health and Bone Resorption in Implant- Supported Fixed Partial Rehabilitations.

PURPOSE: To evaluate peri-implant tissue health and bone resorption in patients with implant-supported fixed partial rehabilitations. In particular, possible correlations between plaque accumulation and bone loss, as well as other periimplant health parameters, were investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 44 patients rehabilitated with fixed implant-supported partial rehabilitations were included. The following parameters were recorded: spontaneous bleeding (SB), suppuration, bleeding on probing (BOP), plaque index (PI), and probing depth (PD). Periapical radiographs were taken to measure crestal bone loss (BL). A nonparametric test (Spearman rank coefficient; rs) was used to identify possible correlations between the clinical parameters recorded. RESULTS: A total of 121 implants were analyzed. Global PI and BOP were 49.58% and 20.25%, respectively. There were no cases of suppuration, and only 2 implants showed spontaneous bleeding. Mean BL was 1.53 mm (SD: 0.98). No implants showed peri-implantitis. There was a weak, statistically significant correlation between PI and BL (rs = 0.27, P [2-tailed] = .99) and between PI and the other peri-implant parameters (BOP: rs = 0.14, P = .14; PD: rs = 0.04, P = .65; SB: rs = -0.08, P = .34). A very weak correlation was also found between BL and BOP (rs = 0.1, P = .2) and between BL and PD (rs = 0.02, P = .7). Correlation was found between BL and age (rs = 0.13, P = .81) and between the other peri-implant parameters and age using dichotomization (> or < 65 years; PI: rs = -0.14, P = .11; PD: rs = -0.21, P = .01; BOP: rs = -0.21, P = .01; SB: rs = 0.05, P = .53). No statistically significant correlations were found between the clinical parameters evaluated and the sex or the dental arch treated (maxilla vs mandible). In contrast, the correlation between periodontal parameters and years elapsed since surgery (follow-up) was significant. CONCLUSIONS: The present research suggests that in implant-supported fixed partial rehabilitations, dental implants with greater plaque accumulation are more likely to present augmented probing depth, peri-implant inflammation, and bone loss, although the correlation is statistically very weak. Patient age and time of follow-up also significantly affected peri-implant health parameters.

Comparative Assessment of Catalase Levels in Peri-Implant Health and Disease.

Peri-implant disease pathogenesis is similar to periodontal disease pathogenesis resulting in production of pro-inflammatory mediators. These mediators alter the redox balance leading to decrease in antioxidants, among which catalase is one of the enzymatic antioxidants. The aim of the study was to compare the levels of catalase in peri-implant health and disease. The present observational study was carried out from June 2022 to December 2022 in the Department of Implantology, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Chennai, India. A total of 60 patients with peri-implant health (Group 1; n = 20), peri-implant mucositis (Group 2; n = 20) and peri-implantitis (Group 3; n = 20) were enrolled. Unstimulated salivary samples were collected and subjected to ELISA for catalase analysis. Catalase levels were then compared between the groups using ANOVA. The mean catalase level in peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis, peri-implanti-tis were 25.07 ± 0.44 U/mL, 18.5 6 ± 0.65 U/mL, and 11.25 ± 0.76 U/mL respectively. The difference between the three groups were statistically significant (P < 0.05). Catalase level decreases with severity of peri-implant diseases. Therefore, catalase can be used as a diagnostic marker for peri-implant diseases.

Comparative Evaluation of C-Reactive Protein Levels among Peri-Implant Health and Disease Conditions.

Peri-implant disease pathogenesis results in production of pro-inflammatory mediators, among which C-reactive protein (CRP) is one of the acute phase reactants. The aim of the study was to comparative CRP levels among peri-implant health and disease conditions. The present study was carried out in the Department of Implantology, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Chennai, India. A total of 40 patients with peri-implant health (n = 10), peri-mucositis (n = 10), early peri-implantitis (n = 10) and advanced peri-implantitis (n = 10) were enrolled. Unstimulated salivary samples were collected and subjected to latex agglutination assay for CRP analysis. CRP levels were then correlated with peri-implant health and diseases. CRP level in peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis, early peri-implantitis and advanced peri-implantitis were 0.18 ± 0.04 mg/dL, 2.05 ± 0.61 mg/dL, 4.14 ± 1.82 mg/dL and 6.21 ± 1.35 mg/dL respectively. There was a statistically significant difference in CRP levels between all the tested groups (ANOVA, P = 0.03). Pearson correlation coefficient analysis revealed a strong positive correlation between CRP and peri-implant health status. CRP level was high among patients with peri-implantitis followed by peri-implant mucositis and peri-implant health. Also, CRP level increases with severity of peri-implant diseases and there exists a positive correlation between CRP level and peri-implant health status.

Influence of keratinized mucosa width on the resolution of peri-implant mucositis: A prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of peri-implant diseases, driven by biofilm accumulation and influenced by factors such as the width of keratinized mucosa (KM), underscores the need for understanding their etiology and management. PURPOSE: To evaluate the association between the KM width and the clinical resolution of peri-implant mucositis after mechanical therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with an implant diagnosed with peri-implant mucositis were allocated to two groups: wide band of KM (WKM ≥ 2 mm) and narrow/no band of KM (NKM < 2 mm). Data and submucosa biofilm were collected at baseline and at 8, 12, and 24 weeks after nonsurgical therapy. A Brunner-Langer model was estimated for longitudinal data to evaluate and compare changes in any clinical parameter throughout follow-up between both groups. Furthermore, the microbial profiles were evaluated by 16S rRNA gene sequencing. RESULTS: A total of 38 implants were analyzed. At 24 weeks, bleeding on probing was substantially reduced in both groups, reaching statistical significance (p < 0.001). Treatment resulted in 23.9% less effective in achieving success for NKM. As such, NKM reduced the odds of disease resolution by 80% compared to WKM. The rest of the explored clinical parameters yielded more favorable outcomes for WKM versus NKM. Neither the alpha nor the beta diversity of the microbial profiles were significantly modulated by KM. CONCLUSIONS: KM width influences the clinical resolution of peri-implant mucositis after mechanical therapy (https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04874467?cond=keratinized%20mucosa&rank=8, NCT04874467, 04/30/2021).

Correlation of C-Reactive Protein and Severity of Peri-Implant Diseases.

Peri-implant disease pathogenesis is similar to periodontal disease pathogenesis resulting in production of pro-inflammatory mediators. These mediators are released during the inflammation phase, among which C-reactive protein (CRP) is one of the acute phase reactants. The aim of the study was to correlate the levels of CRP with the severity of peri-implant diseases. The present observational study was carried out from June 2022 to December 2022 in the Department of Implantology, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Chennai, India. A total of 60 patients with peri-implant health (n = 20), peri-mucositis (n = 20) and peri-implantitis (n = 20) were enrolled. Unstimulated salivary samples were collected and subjected to latex agglutination assay for CRP analysis. CRP levels were then correlated with severity of peri-implant diseases. The mean CRP level in peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis, peri-implantitis were 0.25 ± 0.36 mg/dl, 3.56 ± 0.85 mg/dl and 5.07 ± 0.74 mg/dl, respectively. Pearson correlation coefficient analysis revealed a strong positive correlation between CRP and peri-implant parameters suggesting that the CRP level increased as the severity of peri-implant disease increased. CRP level increases with severity of peri-implant diseases and there exists a positive correlation between CRP level and peri-implant parameters. Therefore, CRP can be used as a diagnostic marker for peri-implant diseases.