An evaluation of peri-implant marginal bone loss according to implant type, surgical technique and prosthetic rehabilitation: a retrospective multicentre and cross-sectional cohort study.

To evaluate implant loss (IL) and marginal bone loss (MBL); follow-up period of up to 10 years after prosthetic loading. Retrospective multi-centre cross-sectional cohort study. Double analysis: (1) all the implants (n = 456) were analysed; (2) to allow for possible cluster error, one implant per patient (n = 143) was selected randomly. Statistical analysis: Spearman's correlation coefficient; Kruskal-Wallis (post-hoc U-Mann-Whitney); Chi-square (post-hoc Haberman). (1) Analysing all the implants (456): IL was observed in patients with past periodontitis (6 vs. 2.2%, p < 0.05), short implants (12 vs. 2.8%, p < 0.001) and when using regenerative surgery (11.3 vs. 2.9%, p < 0.001); greater MBL was observed among smokers (0.39 ± 0.52 vs. 0.2 ± 0.29, p < 0.01), maxillary implants (0.28 ± 0.37 vs. 0.1 ± 0.17, p < 0.0001), anterior region implants (0.32 ± 0.36 vs. 0.21 ± 0.33, p < 0.001), external connection implants (0.2 ± 0.29 vs. 0.63 ± 0.59, p < 0.0001), and 2-3 years after loading (p < 0.0001). (2) analysing the cluster (143): IL was observed in smokers (18.8 vs. 3.5%, p < 0.05), splinted fixed crowns (12.9%, p < 0.01), short implants (22.2 vs. 4.0%, p < 0.01) and when using regenerative surgery (19.2 vs. 3.4%, p < 0.01); greater MBL was observed in maxillary implants (0.25 ± 0.35 vs. 0.11 ± 0.18, p < 0.05), in the anterior region (p < 0.05), in the first 3 years (p < 0.01), in external connection implants (0.72 ± 0.71 vs. 0.19 ± 0.26, p < 0.01) and in short implants (0.38 ± 0.31 vs. 0.2 ± 0.32, p < 0.05). There is greater risk in smokers, patients with past periodontal disease, external connection implants, the use of short implants and when regenerative techniques are used. To prevent MBL and IL, implantologists should be very meticulous in indicating implants in patients affected by these host factors.

Four years survival and marginal bone loss of implants in patients with Down syndrome and cerebral palsy.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate implant survival rate and marginal bone loss (MBL) after 4 years in patients with Down syndrome and cerebral palsy, compared with a healthy control group. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The case group comprises 102 implants in 19 patients (71 cerebral palsy, 21 Down syndrome), and the control group comprises 70 implants in 22 healthy patients. One implant per patient was selected (n = 41 implants) to take clustering effects into account. MBL was measured using two panoramic radiographs (after surgery and 4 years later). Lagervall-Jansson's Index was used. Statistics used are chi-squared test and Haberman's post hoc test. p Value is significant at <0.05. RESULTS: MBL was significantly higher in the cases in all samples (p < 0.001) and when one implant was selected per patient (p < 0.05). More implants were lost in the cases (p < 0.01), especially those with a higher MBL (p < 0.01). MBL (p < 0.05) and implant loss (p < 0.01) increased with age in the cases. The three-unit fixed dental prosthesis (FDP) showed higher MBL (p < 0.05). Down syndrome had a higher MBL than cerebral palsy (entire sample p < 0.0001, one implant per patient p < 0.05). All patients with Down syndrome saw some damage to bone support (entire sample p < 0.0001; one implant per patient p < 0.05). Implant loss occurred only in Down syndrome (p < 0.00001). CONCLUSIONS: MBL and implant loss 4 years after placement are higher in neuropsychiatric disabilities. Down syndrome has a higher risk of MBL and implant loss; therefore, special precautions should be taken when deciding on treatment for these patients. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: As a consequence of this pilot study, professionals should be very cautious in placing implants in patients with Down syndrome.

A systematic review of the oral and craniofacial manifestations of cri du chat syndrome.

Cri du chat syndrome is an autosomal disorder. Because it affects few people in the population it is considered a rare disease, yet it is one of the most common autosomal chromosomal syndromes in humans. It entails pathognomonic alterations that affect the craniofacial and oral anatomy of patients. The aim of this study is to review these craniofacial and oral abnormalities in patients with Cri du chat syndrome. The PubMed Medline database was searched using two different strategies. First, we used "Dentistry" and "Cri du chat" as keywords; second, we used "Cri du chat" and "craniofacial." Seven articles in which the main orofacial and cranio-skeletal characteristics of patients with Cri du chat syndrome were described were selected according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Cri du Chat syndrome entails pathognomonic characteristics in the craniofacial area (epicanthus, short philtrum, and wide nasal bridge), the oral area (mandibular retrognathism and anterior open bite) and the cranial region (alterations at the cranial base angle and a small upper airway). However, more studies on larger samples are needed to specify the orofacial and craniofacial characteristics of patients with Cri du chat syndrome more accurately. Clin. Anat. 29:555-560, 2016. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Protocol for oral implant rehabilitation in a hemophilic HIV-positive patient with type C hepatitis.

CASE REPORT: A 46-year-old man with severe hemophilia A, stage A2 HIV infection and chronic hepatitis C genotype 1A, for whom the treatment plan included implant-supported prostheses in 2 mandibular edentulous sections. The protocol followed included factor VIII replacement concentrate and oral antifibrinolytic therapy. The right mandibular section was fitted with 3 Straumann implants (Ø 4.1 mm, length 10 mm), and the left mandibular section received 2 implants of the same characteristics. The patient showed no postoperative complications. After implant placement, the patient attended scheduled review appointments. After a 3-month period of osseointegration, the prosthesis was fitted. CONCLUSIONS: Although, in this case, the treatment proved successful 2 years postrehabilitation and the protocol used seems safe and effective, long-term prospective studies are needed to evaluate the implant success rate in these patients.

Cardiovascular effect of dental anesthesia with articaine (40 mg with epinefrine 0,5 mg % and 40 mg with epinefrine 1 mg%) versus mepivacaine (30 mg and 20 mg with epinefrine 1 mg%) in medically compromised cardiac patients: a cross-over, randomized, single blinded study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study is to compare cardiovascular safety profiles of two dental anesthetics: articaine versus two standard mepivacaine solutions used during etiological periodontal treatment in cardiovascular patients. STUDY DESIGN: Using a cross-over study design, ten cardiovascular patients were randomly assigned to dental treatment with 1.8 mL of a local anesthetic injected on each quadrant of the mouth: Articaine (40 mg with Epinephrine 0.5 mg % and 40 mg with Epinephrine 1mg %) or Mepivacaine (30 mg and 20 mg with Epinephrine 1mg %). A computer programme enabled continuous longitudinal data collection: O2 saturation, blood pressure (BP) and heart rate (HR). RESULTS: No severe clinical side effects were observed. During the treatment period, we observed statistically significant differences as regards HR between injections with and without adrenalin (p< 0.039) and as regards systolic (p< 0.046) and diastolic (p < 0.046) blood pressure during the stabilization period. In both cases, the parameters under study increase. Age, gender, jaw treated, treatment duration and the rest of cardiovascular variables did not affect the results. None of the patients underwent ischemic alterations or any other complication derived from the treatment or the anesthesia. CONCLUSIONS: According to the results of our study, dental anesthetics with standard concentrations of Epinephrine seem to alter HR and BP. Although no cardiac ischemic alterations or any other cardiovascular complications have been observed, we must be cautious with the administration of anesthetics containing vasoconstrictors in patients with cardiovascular diseases.

Bone loss around narrow implants versus standard diameter implants: Retrospective 2-years case-control study.

BACKGROUND: The objectives were to evaluate the bone loss (BL) around narrow diameter implants (3.3 mm) 2 years after implant loading and compare with the bone loss around conventional-diameter implants (4.1 mm), as well as with clinical and anatomical variables. 2-years follow-up. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Cases: 20 patients either gender-age, narrow implants (Straumann TM-SLA, diameter 3.3 mm); Control: 20 patients matching for gender-age, conventional implants (Straumann TM-SLA, diameter 4.1). Total 82 implants (31 narrow implants and 51 conventional implants) in 40 patients. To avoid statistical bias, a cluster of one implant per patient was randomly selected (20 narrow implants and 20 conventional implants). To evaluate changes resulting from bone loss around the implants, a total of 80 panoramic radiographs were taken of all 40 patients; the first panoramic image was taken at the time of implant loading and the second one 2 years later. Clinical and demographic variables were obtained from the patients' medical records. Statistical method: Spearman's correlation coefficient, chi-squared (Haberman's post hoc), Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests. Statistical significance p< 0.05. RESULTS: No significant differences in bone loss around were found around narrow implants versus conventional implants. Differences linked to tobacco use were found after studying one implant per patient (p< 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: With the limitations of the present study, no significant differences in BL were found when comparing narrow implants with conventional implants after 2 years of implant loading. There were also no differences found when accounting for other demographic and clinical variables, with the exception of tobacco use. Key words:Lagervall & Jansson's index, bone loss, narrow implants, panoramic radiographs.

Using Genetics in Periodontal Disease to Justify Implant Failure in Down Syndrome Patients.

Peri-implant bone loss leading to dental implant failure does not develop in the same way across subjects who apparently present the same condition-specifically, in the case of Down syndrome patients with the same genetic disorder-given that they do not necessarily develop immune-inflammatory disorders to the same extent. METHODS: This retrospective case-control study was aimed at identifying the possible genes involved in implant failure in Down syndrome patients by matching the periodontal disease variable by means of a retrospective case-control study. This process involved using the functional analysis of gene expression software Transcriptome Analysis Console (TAC, Affymetrix, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) and a search for the possible candidate genes involved. Focus was placed on the 92 genes related to the inflammation identified from the TaqMan™ Array Plate Human Inflammation Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). RESULTS: Six genes showed statistically significant results (p < 0.05) in our comparison. Three of them-PLCG2 (p = 0.0333), ALOX5 (p = 0.03) and LTAH4 (p = 0.0081)-were overexpressed in the implant reject group, and the following three were down-regulated: VCAM1 (p = 0.0182), PLA2G2A (p = 0.0034) and PLA2G10 (p = 0.047). CONCLUSION: Statistically significant differences exist in the gene expression involved in osteoclastogenesis, inflammatory response and host defensive response.

Influence of marginal bone loss on peri-implantitis: Systematic review of literature.

BACKGROUND: The marginal bone of dental implants is subjected to slight load modifications over time, conditioning implant survival. Objective: Perform a systematic review of the literature analyzing the factors that contribute to marginal bone loss (MBL) and the subsequent development of peri-implantitis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Bibliographic research in the databases PubMed, Medline and Scopus between 2010 and 2018 was performed. The inclusion criteria were articles published in the last 10 years and that were in English or Spanish, that were carried out on humans, that were cohort studies, that included cases and controls or that used randomized clinical trials. Exclusion criteria removed articles that contained clinical cases, case series or systematic reviews. RESULTS: A total of 90 articles were analyzed that examined all the factors reported in the literature, such as idiosyncratic factors, toxic habits, systemic drugs and implant characteristics (diameter, length, type surface, implant connection, implant design and type of platform at the moment of the prosthetic load). Discussion: Patient characteristics and associated pathologies must be taken into account when assessing MBL. MBL in all dental implants can be considered independent of the type of prosthetic rehabilitation and the moment of load; this was emphasized. The MBL is smaller in dental implants with rough surfaces, switch platforms and infracrestal localization, as they are of multifactorial origin. CONCLUSIONS: All the reviewed articles maintain a common criterion regarding the concept and measurement of the MBL and highlighting the importance of radiodiagnosis for quantification. Longterm prospective studies with unified criteria are needed to reduce bias by identifying the most relevant factors in MBL. Key words:Marginal bone loss, dental implant, peri-implantitis.

Metallothioneins in Failure of Dental Implants and Periodontitis Down Syndrome Patients.

BACKGROUND: Sometimes dental implants seem to be the only therapeutic alternative for the oral rehabilitation of patients with Down syndrome, given that they usually lose all their teeth early due to suffering aggressive periodontitis and they do not usually have the skills required to wear removable prostheses. However, the evolution of dental implants in these patients shows very adverse results. It is possible that basal genetic alterations, or at least some characteristics of these, may underlie these clinical results. The metabolic pathway of metallothioneins, molecules with an important influence on bone metabolism, could be one of the said alterations. AIMS: To determine whether the expression of metallothioneins (MTs) and their metabolic pathway may be identified and related to the periodontitis and lack of osseointegration of dental implants in Down syndrome patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective study of cases and controls by comparing patients with Down syndrome, periodontal disease, and implant failure (four patients, test group) with patients with Down syndrome, without periodontal disease, and without implant failure after two years of following (seven patients, control group), by extracting peripheral blood at the time of the dental examination to extract RNA and its subsequent processing in relation to gene expression of the metabolic pathway of metallothioneins. RESULTS: The results identified low expression in the group of patients with periodontal disease and implant failure of genes MT1E, MT1H, MT1X, MT1A, MT1B, MT1C, MT1L, MT2A, MT1M, and MT1G. CONCLUSIONS: The low MT1 and MT2 gene expression seems to be related to the onset of periodontal disease and implant rejection in Down syndrome patients, although more data are required to confirm whether this relationship is due to one of the two conditions, to both independently, or to the two jointly-this last option being indicated by our current study.

Dental implants placement in paranoid squizofrenic patient with obsessive-compulsive disorder: A case report.

BACKGROUND: Paranoid schizophrenia is a mental illness that involves no observable anatomical alteration. Main characteristic affects the personality of the individual, as well as areas of his own psychology. CASE REPORT: A 33-year-old man with paranoid schizophrenia and obsessive-compulsive disorder in treatment with Haloperidol, Oxcarbazepine, Olanzapine and Seroquel is presented. Dental exploration showed widespread decay mostly cervical with numerous root fragments, agenesis of lateral incisors, impacted wisdom teeth, missing teeth and malocclusion. Treatment plan included restoration of teeth decay, extractions of root fragments and implant-supported prostheses in bilateral upper lateral incisors for aesthetics reason. A previous consultation with a psychiatric specialist was performed and no contraindication were observed. A preliminary radiological examination was performed previous dental treatment and implant placement. Due to patient refusal to replace dental abscenses with implants, inform consent was signed up from his parents. After local anesthesia, first implant was placed at upper right lateral positions (Straumann Bone Level Ø 3.3 mm, length 10 mm). Two weeks later a second implant was placed at upper left lateral position (Straumann Bone Level Ø 3.3 mm, length 12 mm). The patient showed no postoperative complications. After implant placement, the patient attended scheduled review appointments. The prosthesis was placed after a 3-month period of osseointegration. CONCLUSIONS: Implant placement can be considered a suitable option for people with mental disorders. A previous consultation with psychiatric specialists for conducting a good patient management is necessaire. Key words:Paranoid schizophrenia, obsessive-compulsive disorder, dental implants.

Panoramic radiomorphometry and vertebral fractures in Spanish postmenopausal women.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between panoramic radiomorphometric indexes, and the presence of osteoporotic fractures in a Spanish postmenopausal women. METHODS: A sample of 120 women (60 with fragility spine fractures and 60 healthy), aged 55-70 years, with fragility spine fractures, were included in this cross-sectional study that was conducted from 2008 to 2011. All the women were referred to undergo a radiological spine examination, spinal densitometry and a panoramic radiograph for assessing osteoporosis using 3 radiomorphometric indexes: Panoramic Mandibular Index (PMI), Mental Index (MI) and Mandibular Cortical Index (MCI). According to mandibular cortical shape, in MCI, three groups were defined: C3 (osteoporosis), C2 (osteopenia), C1 (health). RESULTS: Significant differences were found between all the MCI groups due to their composition between fractures and non-fractures. C1 group (healthy) has less fractures women than C2 (Bonferroni p<0.001), C1 has less fractures than C3 (Bonferroni p<0.001) and finally, C2 has less fractures than C3 (Bonferroni p<0.006). PMI and MI values were significantly lower in cases than in controls (U Mann-Whitney p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Panoramic radiomorphometrics mandibular indexes such as MCI, PMI, and MI, may be useful for identifying the population at higher risk for fracture. The relationship between panoramic index and osteoporosis remains unclear and further studies using fragility fracture as a real marker of osteoporosis are warranted to clarify the exact role and effect of one condition on the other and the corresponding clinical implications.