Comparison of Two Risk Assessment Scores in Predicting Peri-Implantitis Occurrence during Implant Maintenance in Patients Treated for Periodontal Diseases: A Long-Term Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: There is a need for reliable risk assessment tools to better predict peri-implantitis occurrence. This study compared the long-term prognosis value of two models of risk assessment scoring in predicting peri-implantitis. METHODS: Seventy-three patients with treated periodontitis representing 232 implants and attending long-term implant maintenance were evaluated. The Periodontal Risk Assessment (PRA) score, which combines only periodontal risk factors/indicators, and the Implant Risk Assessment (IRA) score, which combines both periodontal and implant risk factors/indicators, were calculated during implant maintenance. Peri-implantitis was defined by the presence of probing depth ≥6 mm with bleeding on probing/suppuration and bone level ≥3 mm. Analyses were performed at the patient level. RESULTS: The mean implant follow-up was 6.5 years. Peri-implantitis incidence was 17.8%, and high-risk PRA and IRA percentages were 36.9% and 27.3%, respectively. High-risk PRA and IRA were significantly associated with peri-implantitis incidence, with hazard ratio (HR) = 4.8 and 3.65, respectively. Risk factors/indicators considered separately showed reduced associations with peri-implantitis. CONCLUSIONS: The PRA score combining periodontal parameters and IRA score combining both periodontal and implant parameters have comparable value in predicting peri-implantitis. These scores could allow practicians to intercept the risk of peri-implantitis and to manage follow-up modalities in patients with treated periodontitis.

Influence of Periodontitis, Implant, and Prosthesis Characteristics on the Peri-Implant Status: A Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: The association between peri-implant diseases and the periodontal, implant, and prosthesis characteristics has been characterized in various ways. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the link between the peri-implant and periodontal status and the influence of implant and prosthesis parameters during implant follow-up. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred and seven patients with a total of 310 implants that had at least one year of function who were attending periodontal and implant maintenance at a university clinic setting were included in this cross-sectional study. The demographic, periodontal, peri-implant tissue, implant, and prosthesis parameters were recorded. A pocket depth > 4 mm with bleeding on probing defined periodontal/peri-implant soft tissue diseased sites. Analyses were performed at the patient and implant levels using univariable and multivariable mixed regression analysis. RESULTS: The mean implant follow-up was 7.22 years. At the patient level, the bleeding on probing and pocket depth measurements were more pronounced around the implant than around the teeth. The opposite was observed for plaque and the clinical attachment levels. At the implant level, multivariable analysis showed that the periodontal and corresponding peri-implant tissue parameters, such as diseased sites, were closely related. The implant location, bone level, and number were selectively associated with the implant bone level, while cemented retention and emergence restoration profile influenced the implant pocket depth. CONCLUSIONS: The present study suggested that clinical peri-implant and periodontal soft tissue statuses were different, which could be a consequence of the initial implant and prosthesis healing process. However, during implant follow-up, the peri-implant parameters were predominantly associated with their corresponding periodontal parameters regardless of an association with the implant and prosthesis characteristics. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03841656.

Association between periodontitis treatment outcomes and peri-implantitis: A long-term retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Retrospectively evaluate the association of periodontal treatment outcomes and the prevalence of peri-implant diseases around tissue-level implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-six patients with 260 tissue-level implants attending supporting periodontal and implant therapy for more than 3 years were evaluated. Clinical and radiographic periodontal and implant data were recorded at initial examination (T0), before implant placement (T1) and at final re-examination (T2). Two definitions of peri-implantitis severity, PIBE and PIKA, were used corresponding to the presence of periodontal pocket ≥5 mm or ≥6 mm with bleeding on probing or suppuration and radiographic signs of a bone level ≥2 mm, or ≥3 mm during implant follow-up, respectively. Analyses were performed at patient level. RESULTS: The mean implant follow-up per patient was 9.4 years and 38.0% of patients had implant for at least 10 years. Two implants were lost due to peri-implantitis. The prevalence of patients with PIKA and PIBE was 15.1% and 12.8%, respectively. Residual periodontal pockets, clinical attachment loss and bone loss/age at T2 were more pronounced in patients with PIKA and PIBE. Cox regression analysis adjusted with the number of implants per patient showed that residual pockets at T1 were independently associated with PIKA and PIBE. Initial diagnosis of severe periodontitis was associated with PIBE incidence. CONCLUSIONS: The present study showed that periodontal conditions before implant placement are a risk indicator for peri-implantitis incidence. During implant follow-up, the severity of periodontal status appeared to be a reliable indicator of patient susceptibility to peri-implantitis.