The incidence of prostate cancer (PC) accompanying periodontal disease (PD) is anticipated to increase due to population aging. The aim of this study was to determine the association between PD and PC using data in the National Health Insurance Service-Health Examinee Cohort (NHIS-HEC). A random stratified sample of 187,934 South Koreans was collected from the NHIS database from 2002 to 2013. We assessed the relationship between PD and PC while adjusting for potential confounding factors (sex, age, household income, insurance status, residence area, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, cerebral infarction, angina pectoris, myocardial infarction, smoking status, alcohol intake, and regular exercise). The overall incidence of PC with PD among those aged 40 years and older was 0.28% (n = 531). In the multivariate Cox proportional-hazard regression analysis with adjustment for confounding factors, PD was associated with a 14% higher risk of PC (HR = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.01-1.31, P = 0.042). The findings of this study suggest that PD is significantly and positively associated with PC. Further studies are required to identify the mechanisms underlying the links between PD and PC.

PurposeThe aim of this retrospective study was to determine the association between dental implants in the posterior region and traumatic occlusion in the adjacent premolars, using data collected during from 2002 to 2015.MethodsTraumatic occlusion in the adjacent premolars was assessed by examining clinical parameters (bleeding on probing, probing pocket depth, fremitus, and tooth mobility) and radiographic parameters (loss of supporting bone and widening of the periodontal ligament space) over a mean follow-up of 5 years. Clinical factors (gender, age, implant type, maxillary or mandibular position, opposing teeth, and duration of functional loading) were evaluated statistically in order to characterize the relationship between implants in the posterior region and traumatic occlusion in the adjacent premolars.ResultsThe study inclusion criteria were met by 283 patients, who had received 347 implants in the posterior region. The incidence of traumatic occlusion in the adjacent premolars was significantly higher for splinted implants (P=0.004), implants in the maxillary region (P<0.001), and when implants were present in the opposing teeth (P<0.001). The other clinical factors of gender, age, and duration of functional loading were not significantly associated with traumatic occlusion.ConclusionsThis study found that the risk of traumatic occlusion in the adjacent premolars increased when splinted implants were placed in the maxillary molar region and when the teeth opposing an implant also contained implants.

The present study suggests that implants with a higher prosthetic abutment show less MBL, with the abutment height recommended to not exceed 4 mm.

Local delivery agents (LDAs) are widely used in peri-implantitis treatments. The aim of this study was to identify LDAs remaining on the dental implant surfaces and to analyze the components of these residues after applying various cleaning methods. Implants were prepared with a sand-blasted, large-grit, acid-etched surface. Four kinds of LDAs were applied on the implant surfaces: chlorhexidine gel (group 2), tetracycline solution (group 3), and 2 kinds of minocycline hydrochloride agents (groups 4 and 5). Group 1 received normal saline as a control. Two cleaning methods were applied for different durations as follows: (1) running distilled water for 10 seconds (subgroup A), 5 minutes (subgroup B), and 15 minutes (subgroup C); and (2) water spray of a dental-unit chair for 10 seconds (subgroup D) and 5 minutes (subgroup E). Scanning electron microscopy and energy-dispersive x-ray spectroscopy were used to analyze the surface morphology and residue components for all implants. The amount of LDA removed from the implant surfaces in groups 1, 2, 3, and 5 increased with the cleaning duration and pressure. However, Minocline remained coated on the implant surfaces in group 4 under all cleaning conditions. Minocline could not be cleaned off well by water due to its hydrophobicity. Therefore, directly using this agent on implant surfaces with peri-implantitis should be carefully considered. The presence of LDA residues without drug efficacies on implant surfaces might interfere with reosseointegration and act as a reservoir of microorganisms.