Search

Objective: The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to assess factors associated with peri‐implant disease in partially edentulous patients with a history of severe periodontitis or no history of periodontitis. Methods: Partially edentulous patients with a history of severe periodontitis/without history of periodontitis who received implant surgery within the past 6 to 8 years were recalled. Clinical and radiographic examinations were recorded. Periodontal probing depth, marginal bone loss (MBL) and peri‐implantitis were considered as the primary outcome and peri‐implant bleeding on probing (BOP) was considered as the secondary outcome. The following criteria were considered as the predictors, as well: history of severe periodontitis, gender, age, smoking, brushing frequency, recall interval, full‐mouth plaque score, full‐mouth bleeding score, splinted prosthesis, open/tight interproximal contact, width of keratinized mucosa, mucosal thickness, implants placed in the grafted bone and implant type. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were utilized. Results: A total of 88 patients (186 implants) fulfilled the study. Forty‐seven patients (108 implants) had a history of severe periodontitis and 41 patients (78 implants) had no history of periodontitis. There was a higher chance of peri‐implantitis in patients with a history of severe periodontitis (OR = 11.13; p = 0.045), implants with lack of peri‐implant KM (<2 mm) and implants placed in the grafted bone (OR = 14.94, p < 0.001; OR = 4.93, p = 0.047). The risk of peri‐implant MBL ≥3 mm was higher in patients with greater FMBS (OR = 1.20; p < 0.001). The chance of peri‐implant BOP was independently higher in patients who brushed their teeth at most once per day (OR = 3.20; p = 0.04), higher FMBS (OR = 1.16; p < 0.001) and irregular recall visits (OR = 15.34; p = 0.001). Conclusions: Partially edentulous patients with the history of severe periodontitis, lack of peri‐implant KM and implants placed in bone‐grafted sites expressed higher probability of peri‐implantitis. In addition, inadequate frequency of brushing (at most once daily) and irregular recall visits were associated with greater chance of peri‐implant BOP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study aimed to explore the efficacy of Nd:YAG laser-assisted periodontal therapy for management of patients with stage II-IV periodontitis.Methods: Patients who presented with residual periodontal pockets were enrolled. After non-surgical periodontal therapy (NSPT), test sites received Nd:YAG laser (first entrance to pocket: 3 W, 100 μs, 20 Hz; second entrance: 4 W, 600 μs, 20 Hz) and control sites received placebo (laser off). Periodontal probing depth (PPD), clinical attachment level (CAL), gingival recession (GR), bleeding on probing (BOP), and plaque index (PI) were recorded at baseline and 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6-month visits.Results: Twenty patients completed the 6-month period. Significant reductions in PPD, CAL, BOP, and PI values and a significant increase in GR at all follow-up visits compared to the baseline (all P < 0.001) were revealed in both groups. Test sites showed significantly greater improvement in PPD (P = 0.0002) and greater increase in GR (P < 0.0001) compared to the control sites at 6-month visit. There was no difference between two groups regarding CAL gain through the study period (P = 0.23).Conclusion: NSPT+Nd:YAG laser with the current protocol results in greater PPD reduction compared to NSPT alone. However, this reduction is likely because of greater GR rather than attachment gain. Therefore, the adjunction of Nd:YAG laser (with the current setting) to the NSPT for the treatment of residual periodontal pockets did not ameliorate the clinical outcomes (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03365167). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose. This study is aimed at synthesizing the available evidence regarding effectiveness of various modalities (combinations of LRS tasks) and comparison between each two modalities in terms of gingival display reduction, success rate, stability of the results, patient's satisfaction, and postoperative morbidity. Materials and Methods. The electronic databases including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science Cochrane Library, Google Scholar databases, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO International Clinical Trial Registry Platform were searched up to 27th June 2020 regarding lip repositioning surgery. The modalities were defined as the combinations of the following tasks: frenectomy (yes/no), flap thickness (full/partial), and myotomy (yes/no). Meta-analyses were performed on gingival display change from baseline to months 3, 6, and 12 in each modalities using Stata (v.16). Results. 38 studies (including three clinical trials, two quasiexperimental studies, seven case series, and 26 case reports) met the criteria for final inclusion. The mean gingival display reduced from baseline to 6 months (WMD = − 2.90 , 95% CI: -4.85 to -0.95) in the patients undergoing the "frenectomy + full-thickness flap + myotomy" modality. This parameter decreased from baseline to 6 and 12 months, respectively (WMD = − 2.68 , 95% CI: -3.49 to -1.86; WMD = − 2.52 , 95% CI: -4.40 to -0.64), in patients undergoing the "frenectomy + partial-thickness flap + without myotomy" modality. In patients who undergone the "without frenectomy + partial-thickness flap + without myotomy" modality, gingival display reduced from baseline to 6 months (WMD = − 3.22 , 95% CI: -5.61 to -0.84). Almost 83% of patients with modality 1 had satisfaction. Conclusions. Gingival display within the 6 months after LRS could be reduced with all modalities. Descriptively, the greatest reduction was observed in patients with the modality not including the frenulum. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives This retrospective cross-sectional study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of biologic complications of implants in patients treated by fixed implant supported prosthesis without regular maintenance program. Materials and methods One hundred thirty-four patients with 478 implants, installed during a 10-year period (2001-2010), were recruited for clinical and radiographic follow-up examinations. The periodontal and implant health status were assessed to determine the prevalence of peri-implant diseases. Results The mean ± SD loading time for implants was 4.43 ± 2.25 years. Fifty-five percentage of the implants were tissue-level implants. Peri-implantitis was diagnosed in 20% of patients and 8.8% of implants. Subject-based and implant-based prevalence of mucositis amounted to 48.5% and 40%, respectively. Mean crestal bone loss in tissue-level and bone-level implants were 0.28 ± 0.53 mm and 1.37 ± 1.5 mm, respectively. Smoking and lack of keratinized mucosa was associated with peri-implantitis at an odds ratio of OR = 2.57 and 3.89, respectively. Conclusions After a 5-year period of loading without any regular maintenance program, one out of five patients would experience peri-implantitis. Tissue-level implants had lower values of peri-implantitis prevalence and crestal bone loss. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]