Aims: Over the past decades, the placement of dental implants has become a routine procedure in the oral rehabilitation of fully and partially edentulous patients. However, the number of patients/implants affected by peri-implant diseases is increasing. As there are -in contrast to periodontitis -at present no established and predictable concepts for the treatment of peri-implantitis, primary prevention is of key importance. The management of peri-implant mucositis is considered as a preventive measure for the onset of peri-implantitis. Therefore, the remit of this working group was to assess the prevalence of peri-implant diseases, as well as risks for peri-implant mucositis and to evaluate measures for the management of peri-implant mucositis. Methods: Discussions were informed by four systematic reviews on the current epidemiology of peri-implant diseases, on potential risks contributing to the development of peri-implant mucositis, and on the effect of patient and of professionally administered measures to manage peri-implant mucositis. This consensus report is based on the outcomes of these systematic reviews and on the expert opinion of the participants. Results: Key findings included: (i) meta-analysis estimated a weighted mean prevalence for peri-implant mucositis of 43% (CI: 32-54%) and for peri-implantitis of 22% (CI: 14-30%); (ii) bleeding on probing is considered as key clinical measure to distinguish between peri-implant health and disease; (iii) lack of regular supportive therapy in patients with peri-implant mucositis was associated with increased risk for onset of peri-implantitis; (iv) whereas plaque accumulation has been established as aetiological factor, smoking was identified as modifiable patient-related and excess cement as local risk indicator for the development of peri-implant mucositis; (v) patient-administered mechanical plaque control (with manual or powered toothbrushes) has been shown to be an effective preventive measure; (vi) professional intervention comprising oral hygiene instructions and mechanical debridement revealed a reduction in clinical signs of inflammation; (vii) adjunctive measures (antiseptics, local and systemic antibiotics, air-abrasive

Access surgery has been investigated in one study demonstrating that resolution occurred in 58% of the lesions. No single method of surface decontamination (chemical agents, air abrasives and lasers) was found to be superior. The use of regenerative procedures such as bone graft techniques with or without the use of barrier membranes has been reported with various degrees of success. However, it must be stressed that such techniques do not address disease resolution but rather merely attempt to fill the osseous defect.

Peri-implant and periodontal pockets share a number of anatomical features but also have distinct differences. These differences make peri-implant pockets more susceptible to trauma and infection than periodontal pockets. Inadequate maintenance can lead to infections (defined as peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis) within peri-implant pockets. These infections are recognized as inflammatory diseases, which ultimately lead to the loss of supporting bone. Diagnostic and treatment methods conventionally used in periodontics have been adopted to assess and treat these diseases. Controlling infection includes elimination of the biofilm from the implant surface and efficient mechanical debridement. However, the prosthetic supra-structure and implant surface characteristics can complicate treatment. Evidence shows that when appropriately managed, peri-implant mucositis is reversible. Nonsurgical therapy, with or without the use of antimicrobials, will occasionally resolve peri-implantitis, but for the majority of advanced lesions this approach is insufficient and surgery is indicated. The major objective of the surgical approach is to provide access and visualize the clinical situation. Hence, a more informed decision can be made regarding whether to use a resective or a regenerative surgical technique. Evidence shows that following successful decontamination, surgical treatment to regenerate the bone can be performed, and a number of regenerative techniques have been proposed. After treatment, regular maintenance and good oral hygiene are essential for a predictable outcome and long-term stability.

No abstract

The use of for dental implant surgery may be justified, as it appears to improve implant survival in the short term and also results in less post-operative pain and interference with daily activities. From the results of this study, it appears that prophylactic antibiotics may also be beneficial both in terms of implant survival, especially when the surgical procedure is prolonged due to its difficulty, high number of implants placed or operator's inexperience.