Accuracy of periapical radiography in assessing bone level in implants affected by peri‐implantitis: a cross‐sectional study

García-García, Marta; Mir-Marí, Javier; Benić, Goran I.; Figueiredo, Rui; Valmaseda‐Castellón, Eduard

doi:10.1111/jcpe.12491

Cited by 61 publications

(73 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…(2017) concluded that probing depth around peri‐implantitis affected implants significantly underestimated the true bone level by 1 mm. Garcia‐Garcia, Mir‐Mari, Benic, Figueiredo and Valmaseda‐Castellon (2016) showed a significant underestimation of the interproximal bone level by intra‐oral radiography of 1.3 mm on average. Merli et al.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

How do peri‐implant biologic parameters correspond with implant survival and peri‐implantitis? A critical review

Doornewaard

Jacquet

Cosyn

et al. 2018

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThe aim of this critical review was to evaluate whether commonly used biologic diagnostic parameters correspond to implant survival and peri‐implantitis prevalence.Materials and methodsPublications from 2011 to 2017 were selected by an electronic search using the Pubmed database of the US National Library of Medicine. Prospective and retrospective studies with a mean follow‐up time of at least 5 years and reporting prevalence of peri‐implantitis as well as mean bone loss and standard deviation were selected. The correlation between reported prevalence of peri‐implantitis and reported implant survival, mean follow‐up time, mean bone loss, mean probing depth, and mean bleeding on probing was calculated. Mean bone loss and standard deviation were used for estimation of proportion of implants with bone loss exceeding 1, 2, and 3 mm.ResultsFull‐text analysis was performed for 255 papers from 4,173 available ones, and 41 met all the inclusion criteria. The overall mean weighted survival rate was 96.9% (89.9%–100%) and the reported prevalence of peri‐implantitis ranged between 0% and 39.7%, based on 15 different case definitions. The overall weighted bone loss was 1.1 mm based on 8,182 implants and an average mean loading time ranging from 5 to 20 years. No correlation was found between mean bone loss and the reported prevalence of peri‐implantitis. The estimated prevalence of implants with bone loss above 2 mm was 23%. The overall weighted mean probing depth was 3.3 mm, and mean weighted bleeding was 52.2%. Only a weak correlation was found between survival and function time (r = −0.49). There was no relation between the probing depth or bleeding and the mean bone loss, mean follow‐up time, and reported prevalence of peri‐implantitis.ConclusionBiologic parameters mean probing depth and mean bleeding on probing do not correlate with mean bone loss and this irrespective of follow‐up. Case definition for peri‐implantitis varied significantly between studies indicating that an unambiguous definition based on a specified threshold for bone loss is not agreed upon in the literature.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

How do peri‐implant biologic parameters correspond with implant survival and peri‐implantitis? A critical review

Doornewaard

Jacquet

Cosyn

et al. 2018

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…16 Digital intraoral radiographs were taken using the long-cone paralleling technique. To prepare parallel radiographs, a film holder (Dentsply Rinn, PA, USA) was used to standardize the angulation between the X-ray beam and the film.…”

Section: Peri-implant Bone Lossmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stability and bone loss around submerged and non-submerged implants in diabetic and non-diabetic patients: a 7-year follow-up

Zahrani

Mutairi

2018

Braz. oral res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stability and bone loss around submerged and non-submerged implants in diabetic and non-diabetic patients: a 7-year follow-up Abstract: To evaluate peri-implant bone loss (PIBL) and stability around submerged and non-submerged dental implants in patients with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Thirty-five T2DM and non-diabetic (NT2DM) patients were included in this study. Demographic data were recorded using a questionnaire and PIBL was measured on digital radiographs. Resonance frequency analysis (RFA) was carried out for each implant at the time of fixture placement and at 3 months in both groups. P values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. One hundred and eighteen dental implants with a mean height of 10 to 12 mm and 3.3 to 4.1 mm in diameter were placed. The comparison of the mean RFA values at baseline and at 3 months was statistically significant (p = 0.008) in T2DM patients. The inter-group mean RFA values at baseline and at 3 months were not significant (p > 0.05). PIBL was significantly high in T2DM as compared to NT2DM patients at each follow-up (p < 0.05). At 2, 3, and 7 years, non-submerged dental implants showed significantly high PIBL in T2DM patients as compared to NT2DM individuals (p<0.05). The results of the present clinical study demonstrate increased PIBL around non-submerged single-tooth implant-supported restorations in T2DM patients, which may be due to the immune inflammatory status.

show abstract

“…Guided bone regeneration (GBR) is a predictable technique for augmenting the alveolar ridge width that has been used for more than two decades, and osseointegration and long-term implant survival rate have been reported to be similar in grafted areas than in native bone [4, 5]. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of membrane exposure on lateral ridge augmentation: a case-controlled study

Eskan¹,

Girouard²,

Morton

et al. 2017

Int J Implant Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe effect of membrane exposure on guided bone regeneration (GBR) for lateral ridge augmentation has been poorly addressed. This case-controlled study aimed to investigate potential effect of membrane exposure lateral ridge augmentation and subsequent implant placement.MethodsA total of 14 patients that did receive lateral ridge augmentation procedure using allogeneic cancellous graft particulate in combination with an alloplastic bioresorbable matrix barrier were retrospectively selected for this study. Bone width was measured at the crest with a digital caliper before bone augmentation and at the reopening for implant placement 4 months later for all patients. Cases where primary flap closure was achieved and the barrier did not expose throughout the time until implant placement were assigned to the control group (n = 7). Cases where primary closure could not be achieved or a barrier exposure happened within the first week following the initial surgery were assigned to the test group.ResultsThe measured alveolar ridge width before surgery as well as after GBR procedure were not statistically significant different between the two groups (p > 0.05). Both groups showed a significant (p < 0.05) increase in their mean alveolar ridge width 4 months after later augmentation procedure, from 3.4 ± 1.2 to 6.0 ± 1.1 mm in the control group and from 3.6 ± 1.0 to 5.0 ± 1.4 mm in the test group. However, the mean alveolar ridge gain was significantly greater in the control group than in the test group (p < 0.05). Consequently, the reduction of the augmented alveolar ridge was significantly higher in the test group averaging to 4.7 mm than for the control group showing a loss of 3.1 mm after 4 months, respectively. However, in all 14 cases, successful implant placement was achieved after 4 months.ConclusionsWithin the limit of this study, it can be concluded that early exposure of a bioresorbable matrix barrier during lateral ridge augmentation may compromise the results of the GBR procedure but may still result in a favorable alveolar ridge width gain that allows for the placement of dental implants.

show abstract

Accuracy of periapical radiography in assessing bone level in implants affected by peri‐implantitis: a cross‐sectional study

Abstract: The intra-operatively measured peri-implant bone levels were more apical than the radiographic bone levels. The intra-operatively assessed peri-implant bone levels (SurgBL) were similar at all the circumferential positions around the implant.

Cited by 61 publications

References 34 publications

How do peri‐implant biologic parameters correspond with implant survival and peri‐implantitis? A critical review

How do peri‐implant biologic parameters correspond with implant survival and peri‐implantitis? A critical review

Stability and bone loss around submerged and non-submerged implants in diabetic and non-diabetic patients: a 7-year follow-up

The effect of membrane exposure on lateral ridge augmentation: a case-controlled study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About