Prevalence and risk indicators for peri-implant diseases: A literature review.

Peri-implant diseases are known as undesirable conditions that can occur after implant therapy. Although several risk indicators are becoming clear, the causes of peri-implant diseases have not been completely investigated. The purpose of this review was to summarize the prevalence and risk indicators for peri-implant diseases by referring to current papers from various angles. Many studies have reported the varied prevalence of peri-implant mucositis (23.9%-88.0% at the patient level and 9.7%-81.0% at the implant level) and peri-implantitis (8.9%-45% at the patient level and 4.8%-23.0% at the implant level). Additionally, several studies concluded that poor oral hygiene and lack of regular maintenance were strongly correlated with the development of both peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. Diabetes and a history of periodontitis were revealed as risk indicators for peri-implantitis. However, there was no definitive conclusion about the correlations between peri-implant diseases and other factors such as smoking, the shape of the implant superstructure, and the condition of the keratinized mucosa. Further studies useful for evidence-based decision-making are needed for predictable implant therapy in the long term.

Evaluation of decontamination methods of oral biofilms formed on screw-shaped, rough and machined surface implants: an ex vivo study.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effect of several representative decontamination methods of oral biofilms on different implant surfaces. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Eleven participants wore a hard resin splint carrying 6 rough (GC Aadva® implant; 3.3-mm diameter, 8-mm length) or machined (not commercially available) surface implants for 4 days to accumulate dental plaque naturally on the titanium surfaces of the implants. Apart from surface roughness, the morphology of all implants was identical. After detaching the implants from the splints, the ability of the following decontamination methods-gauze soaked in saline (G), ultrasonic scaler (US), air abrasive (Air), rotary stainless steel instrument (Rot), and Er:YAG laser (Las)-to cleanse the contaminated implant surface for 1 min extra-orally was tested. The control (Cont) group did not receive any decontamination. Scanning electron microscopic (SEM) investigation of one participant's samples was employed to examine the post-instrumented implant surface for qualitative analysis, and bacterial culture of the remaining 10 participants' samples was performed to count the number of colony-forming units (CFU) for quantitative analysis. The experimental sequence was initially performed for the rough surface implants and then similarly repeated for the machined surface implants. Bacterial CFU counts among the six groups were analyzed using the Steel-Dwass test, and differences between rough and machined surface implants were determined using the Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: G and Rot eliminated most biofilms on machined surface implants according to SEM analysis. G, Air, and Rot removed significantly more of the biofilms on rough and machined surface implants compared with US according to CFU counts. Moreover, G significantly reduced more biofilms than Las on machined surface implants. The analysis between rough and machined surface implants showed that Cont, G, and US were better able to cleanse biofilms on machined surface implants compared with rough surface implants. CONCLUSIONS: Gauze soaked in saline and rotary stainless steel instruments may be advantageous for cleansing contaminated implant surfaces based on the qualitative and quantitative analyses. In contrast, air abrasives were not shown to be preferable in the qualitative analyses. Additionally, apart from the Er:YAG laser, the reduction of biofilms assessed in both qualitative and quantitative analyses demonstrated that all decontamination methods were better at cleansing machined surface implants compared with rough surface implants.

Risk indicators for marginal bone resorption around implants in function for at least 4 years: A retrospective longitudinal study.

BACKGROUND: Marginal bone stability is considered one of the most important issues in implant dentistry. It is essential to understand how various factors influence bone resorption around implants. The purpose of this retrospective longitudinal study was to identify potential risk indicators associated with marginal bone resorption around implants in function for at least 4 years. METHODS: Several systemic-related, intraoral-related, implant-related factors were collected. Marginal bone level change (MBLC) was determined by comparing intraoral radiographs taken at baseline (1 year after prosthesis delivery), and at follow-up (over 3 years from baseline). A hierarchical regression analysis using liner mixed-effects models was performed to examine correlations between MBLC and various factors. RESULTS: Overall, 514 patients with 1535 implants were analyzed. The mean age of the participants was 62.9 years. Mean annual MBLC was 0.048 mm, and mean functional time was 5.96 years. The result showed that the following explanatory variables had significant effects on MBLC: functional time, plaque control record > 20%, Eichner index C1-3, maxilla, cement-retained superstructure, and keratinized mucosa width < 2 mm. We did not find statistically significant associations between bone resorption and some variables known as risk factors, such as diabetes, smoking, and history of periodontitis. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of this study, longer functional time, poor oral hygiene, loss of occlusal support, location in the maxilla, cement-retained superstructure, and less keratinized mucosa should be considered as risk indicators for bone resorption around implants.

Peri-implant tissue healing at implants with different designs and placement protocols: An experimental study in dogs.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the peri-implant tissue response to subcrestal or crestal placement of implants with or without "platform-switched" implant/abutment connections. MATERIAL AND METHODS: On each side of the mandible in six Labrador dogs, two "platform-switched" (PS) implants and two implants with matching implant/abutment diameters (PM) were placed in a crestal or a 1.5 mm subcrestal position. Sulcus formers/abutments were connected, baseline radiographs obtained and the distance between the abutment-fixture junction (A/F) and the marginal bone level (B) was determined. Five months later, radiographic and clinical examinations were repeated and biopsies were obtained and processed for histological analysis. RESULTS: The radiographic analysis showed that marginal bone level changes occurred during the first observation period (13 weeks). PS-implants showed minor marginal bone level alterations during the full observation period (20 weeks), regardless of placement depth. For PM-implants, placement had a significant impact on bone level changes; crestal placement resulted in a mean bone loss of 0.4 mm and subcrestal placement in a 1.5 mm bone loss. The histometric measurements resulted in a distance A/F-B of 0.6 and 0.0 mm for PS implants, placed in a crestal or subcrestal position, respectively. The corresponding distance at PM-implants was 1.5 mm irrespective of placement protocol. The peri-implant mucosa was thicker at subcrestally placed implants as compared to a crestal placement. CONCLUSIONS: Bone remodeling occurred within the early healing phase. During the full 20 weeks of observation, PS-implants demonstrated significantly less crestal bone loss compared to PM-implants.