Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The effect of the interproximal contour of single external hexagon implant restorations on the prevalence of peri-implantitis: A retrospective study.
Volp Junior, Luiz Carlos; Matarazzo, Flávia; Dias, Debora Reis; de Oliveira, Ricardo Puziol; Sábio, Sérgio; Araújo, Maurício G.
Afiliação
  • Volp Junior LC; Department of Dentistry, State University of Maringá, Maringá, Brazil.
  • Matarazzo F; Department of Dentistry, State University of Maringá, Maringá, Brazil.
  • Dias DR; Department of Dentistry, State University of Maringá, Maringá, Brazil.
  • de Oliveira RP; Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.
  • Sábio S; Department of Dentistry, State University of Maringá, Maringá, Brazil.
  • Araújo MG; Department of Dentistry, State University of Maringá, Maringá, Brazil.
J Prosthodont ; 33(7): 655-662, 2024 Aug.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38487989
ABSTRACT

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.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Peri-Implantite Limite: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Peri-Implantite Limite: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article