Search

The present systematic review evaluated the efficacy of adjunctive therapies in the treatment of peri-implantitis. Studies comparing the outcome of conventional surgical- or nonsurgical mechanical debridement with the addition of an adjunctive therapeutic modality were identified through an electronic and hand search of available literature. Following data extraction, meta-analyses were performed on the primary outcome measures. The effects of the adjunctive therapies on bleeding on probing (13 studies), probing pocket depth (9 studies), and radiographic bone level changes (7 studies) were analyzed to evaluate potential clinical benefit. Heterogeneity was expressed as the I2 index. Fixed and random effect models were demonstrated. The potential benefit of adjunctive therapies over control procedures was evaluated in 18 studies, representing a total of 773 implants. Quality assessment of the studies found only 3 studies to be at a low risk of bias. Meta-analysis among the different additional modalities revealed chemical therapy demonstrating significant effects in probing pocket depth reduction (0.58 mm; 0.44–0.72) and radiographic bone level gain (0.54 mm; 0.16–0.92). No significant improvements in bleeding on probing reduction were found using any adjunctive therapy. Available evidence on the benefits of adjunctive therapy to nonsurgical or surgical mechanical debridement in the treatment of peri-implantitis is limited by low numbers of standardized, controlled studies for individual therapies, heterogeneity between studies, and a variety of outcome measures. The lack of effect of any adjunctive therapy in reducing bleeding on probing questions the overall effectiveness over conventional treatment. The long-term clinical benefit potential of these therapies is not demonstrated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the efficacy of chlorhexidine (CHX) as an adjunctive therapy to mechanical debridement in the treatment of peri-implant diseases. Five databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trails, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov) were searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing mechanical debridement combined with CHX to mechanical debridement alone for patients with peri-implant disease were identified. The trial investigators evaluated factors indicating inflammatory levels, including bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), and clinical attachment level (CAL). Six RCTs with 207 patients were ultimately included in this review. Low- to moderate-quality evidence demonstrated that the adjunctive CHX therapy had no significant effect on BOP reduction within 1 month (mean difference [MD], 0.10; 95% confidence interval [CI], −0.06 to 0.25), 3–4 months (MD, 0.06; 95% CI, −0.03 to 0.15), and 6–8 months (MD, 0.06; 95% CI, −0.03 to 0.14) of follow-up. Significant differences in PD reduction and CAL gain were also not found. Although 1 subgroup analysis revealed a significant result (MD, 009; 95% CI, 0.01–0.18) for the use of CHX solution, this could be interpreted as clinically slight. Based on available evidence, adding CHX to mechanical debridement, compared with mechanical debridement alone, did not significantly enhance the clinical results. Therefore, clinicians should consider the negligible effect of adjunctive CHX. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Peri-implant diseases have received much attention since dental implants are generally used in contemporary dentistry. Several contributing factors associated with the development of peri-implant diseases have also been investigated. The prevalence of peri-implantitis has been reported but with great heterogeneity because of a lack of a universally accepted classification system that could define the extent and severity of peri-implantitis. Several parameters-including radiographic bone loss, probing depth, bleeding on probing, and suppuration-have been introduced in these reports to assist with clinical diagnosis. This article provides an objective evaluation of these parameters based on currently available evidence, offers further recommendations, and proposes a multidomain scale for diagnosis of peri-implantitis. Future investigations and modifications may be needed to develop a comprehensive, evidence-based classification system that addresses the multifactorial etiology of peri-implant diseases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A case study is presented which focuses on a model-guided flapless immediate implant placement and provisionalization in the esthetic zone utilizing a nanostructured titanium implant. Topics covered include the advantages of model-guided surgery over computer-guided surgery for implant placement, the benefits of flapless surgery for both the patient and the dentist, and patient description.

Dental implant treatment can be complicated with infection. A list of possible causes includes overheating during the osteotomy, bacterial contamination from an adjacent tooth, residual bacteria from the infected tooth that previously occupied the site, bone microfractures from overloading or loading too soon, and residual space left around the implant after it is seated. Most treatments entail surgical debridement of the lesion and chemical detoxification of the apical or exposed portion of the implant surface with citric acid, tetracycline, or chlorhexidine gluconate as well as guided tissue regenerative or guided bone regenerative procedures. This article describes the case of an active labiolateral peri-implantitis from a previous infectious site at tooth 12 in a patient who was a chronic steroid user. The patient was treated with surgical debridement and no implant surface detoxification and regenerative procedures with xenograft of PepGen P-15 and an absorbable collagen membrane. The patient was advised to discontinue steroid therapy. This resulted in resolution of the associated signs and symptoms of infection and new bone formation in the radiograph. The negative effect of corticosteroids on calcium metabolism and bone regeneration is discussed. The potential implications of steroid use for implant dentistry are critically appraised, and guidelines are proposed for pre- and postoperative management that may assist in the successful implant-supported rehabilitation of this patient category. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]