Search

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of reconstructive peri-implantitis treatment. Materials and Methods: Forty participants, with peri-implantitis and a contained intraosseous defect, were randomized to access flap (control) or access flap with xenograft and collagen membrane (test). All received systemic antimicrobials. Blinded examiners recorded probing depths (PD), bleeding and suppuration on probing (BOP & SOP), soft tissue levels, and marginal bone levels (MBL) at baseline and 12 months. Patient reported outcomes were recorded. The primary outcome was PD change. Results: All 40 participants (40 implants) completed the 12-month study. The mean (standard deviation) PD reduction (deepest site) was 4.2 (1.8) mm in the control and 3.7 (1.9) mm in the test group. MBL gain (deepest site) was 1.7 (1.6) mm in the control and 2.4 (1.4) mm in the test group. Absence of BOP & SOP was observed at 60% of both control and test implants. Buccal recession was 0.9 (1.6) mm in the control and 0.4 (1.1) mm in the test group. A successful outcome (absence of PD ≥ 5 mm with BOP, absence of SOP and absence of progressive bone loss) was achieved for 90% of the control and 85% of test group implants. No statistically significant differences in clinical or radiographic parameters were found between treatment groups. 30% of participants experienced mild gastro-intestinal disturbances. Reporting followed CONSORT guidelines. Conclusion: Similar clinical and radiographic improvements at 12 months were observed with high levels of patient satisfaction for both the access flap and xenograft covered by collagen membrane groups. Registered clinical trials.gov. ID:NCT03163602 (23/05/2017).

Objectives: The aim of Working Group 4 was to address patient benefits associated with implant dentistry. Focused questions on (a) dental patient-reported outcomes (dPROs), (b) improvement in orofacial function, and (c) preservation of orofacial tissues in partially and fully edentulous patients following provision of implant-retained/supported dental prostheses were addressed. Materials and methods: Three systematic reviews formed the basis for discussion. Participants developed statements and recommendations determined by group consensus based on the findings of the systematic reviews. These were then presented and accepted following further discussion and modifications as required by the plenary of the 7th ITI Consensus Conference, taking place in 2023 in Lisbon, Portugal. Results: Edentulous patients wearing complete dentures (CD) experience substantial improvements in overall dPROs and orofacial function following treatment with either complete implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (CIFDP) or implant overdentures (IODs). With respect to dPROs, mandibular IODs retained by two implants are superior to IODs retained by one implant. However, increasing the number of implants beyond two, does not further improve dPROs. In fully edentulous patients, rehabilitation with CIFDP or IOD is recommended to benefit the preservation of alveolar bone and masseter muscle thickness. Conclusions: Completely edentulous patients benefit substantially when at least the mandible is restored using an CIFDP or an IOD compared to CD. In fully edentulous patients, implant prostheses are the best option for tooth replacement. The availability of this treatment modality should be actively promoted in all edentulous communities, including those with limited access and means.

Objective: To evaluate the influence of implant and prosthetic components on peri-implant tissue health. A further aim was to evaluate peri-implant soft-tissue changes following surgical peri-implantitis treatment. Materials and methods: Group discussions based on two systematic reviews (SR) and one critical review (CR) addressed (i) the influence of implant material and surface characteristics on the incidence and progression of peri-implantitis, (ii) implant and restorative design elements and the associated risk for peri-implant diseases, and (iii) peri-implant soft-tissue level changes and patient-reported outcomes following peri-implantitis treatment. Consensus statements, clinical recommendations, and implications for future research were discussed within the group and approved during plenary sessions. Results: Data from preclinical in vivo studies demonstrated significantly greater radiographic bone loss and increased area of inflammatory infiltrate at modified compared to non-modified surface implants. Limited clinical data did not show differences between modified and non-modified implant surfaces in incidence or progression of peri-implantitis (SR). There is some evidence that restricted accessibility for oral hygiene and an emergence angle of >30 combined with a convex emergence profile of the abutment/prosthesis are associated with an increased risk for peri-implantitis (CR). Reconstructive therapy for peri-implantitis resulted in significantly less soft-tissue recession, when compared with access flap. Implantoplasty or the adjunctive use of a barrier membrane had no influence on the extent of peri-implant mucosal recession following peri-implantitis treatment (SR).

A classification for peri-implant diseases and conditions was presented. Focused questions on the characteristics of peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis, peri-implantitis, and soft- and hard-tissue deficiencies were addressed. Peri-implant health is characterized by the absence of erythema, bleeding on probing, swelling, and suppuration. It is not possible to define a range of probing depths compatible with health; Peri-implant health can exist around implants with reduced bone support. The main clinical characteristic of peri-implant mucositis is bleeding on gentle probing. Erythema, swelling, and/or suppuration may also be present. An increase in probing depth is often observed in the presence of peri-implant mucositis due to swelling or decrease in probing resistance. There is strong evidence from animal and human experimental studies that plaque is the etiological factor for peri-implant mucositis. Peri-implantitis is a plaque-associated pathological condition occurring in tissues around dental implants, characterized by inflammation in the peri-implant mucosa and subsequent progressive loss of supporting bone. Peri-implantitis sites exhibit clinical signs of inflammation, bleeding on probing, and/or suppuration, increased probing depths and/or recession of the mucosal margin in addition to radiographic bone loss. The evidence is equivocal regarding the effect of keratinized mucosa on the long-term health of the peri-implant tissue. It appears, however, that keratinized mucosa may have advantages regarding patient comfort and ease of plaque removal. Case definitions in day-to-day clinical practice and in epidemiological or disease-surveillance studies for peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis, and peri-implantitis were introduced. The proposed case definitions should be viewed within the context that there is no generic implant and that there are numerous implant designs with different surface characteristics, surgical and loading protocols. It is

AIM: To monitor over 12 months clinical and radiographic changes occurring after adjunctive local delivery of minocycline microspheres for the treatment of peri-implantitis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In 25 partially edentulous subjects, 31 implants diagnosed with peri-implantitis were treated. Three weeks after oral hygiene instruction, mechanical debridement and local antiseptic cleansing using 0.2% chlorhexidine gel, baseline (Day 0) parameters were recorded. Minocycline microspheres (Arestin) were locally delivered to each implant site with bone loss and a probing pocket depth (PPD) >or=5 mm. Rescue therapy with Arestin was allowed at Days 180 and 270 at any site exhibiting an increase in PPD>or=2 mm from the previous visit. The following clinical parameters were recorded at four sites/implant at Day 0, 10, 30, 60, 90, 180, 270 and 360: PPD, clinical attachment level (CAL), bleeding on probing (BOP) and plaque index (PlI). RESULTS: Six implants in six subjects were either rescued or exited because of persisting active peri-implantitis. Successful implants showed a statistically significant reduction in both PPD and percentage of sites with BOP between baseline and Day 360 (P<0.05). At mesial implant sites, the mean PPD reduction amounted to 1.6 mm (95% CI: 0.9-2.2 mm, P<0.001) and was accompanied by a statistically significant reduction of the BOP value (P<0.001). Binary regression analysis showed that the clinical parameters and smoking history could not discriminate between successfully treated and rescued or exited implants at any observation time point. CONCLUSION: Non-surgical mechanical treatment of peri-implantitis lesions with adjunctive local delivery of microencapsulated minocycline led to positive effects on clinical parameters up to 12 months.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the microbiological outcome of local administration of minocycline hydrochloride microspheres 1 mg (Arestin) in cases with peri-implantitis and with a follow-up period of 12 months. MATERIAL AND METHODS: After debridement, and local administration of chlorhexidine gel, peri-implantitis cases were treated with local administration of minocycline microspheres (Arestin). The DNA-DNA checkerboard hybridization method was used to detect bacterial presence during the first 360 days of therapy. RESULTS: At Day 10, lower bacterial loads for 6/40 individual bacteria including Actinomyces gerensceriae (P<0.1), Actinomyces israelii (P<0.01), Actinomyces naeslundi type 1 (P<0.01) and type 2 (P<0.03), Actinomyces odontolyticus (P<0.01), Porphyromonas gingivalis (P<0.01) and Treponema socranskii (P<0.01) were found. At Day 360 only the levels of Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans were lower than at baseline (mean difference: 1x10(5); SE difference: 0.34x10(5), 95% CI: 0.2x10(5) to 1.2x10(5); P<0.03). Six implants were lost between Days 90 and 270. The microbiota was successfully controlled in 48%, and with definitive failures (implant loss and major increase in bacterial levels) in 32% of subjects. CONCLUSIONS: At study endpoint, the impact of Arestin on A. actinomycetemcomitans was greater than the impact on other pathogens. Up to Day 180 reductions in levels of Tannerella forsythia, P. gingivalis, and Treponema denticola were also found. Failures in treatment could not be associated with the presence of specific pathogens or by the total bacterial load at baseline. Statistical power analysis suggested that a case control study would require approximately 200 subjects.