Assessment of changes in the oral tactile function of the soft tissues by implant placement in the anterior maxilla: a prospective study

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to assess the somatosensory function in the peri-implant soft tissues in the anterior jaw bone by means of two psychophysical tests. Light-touch sensation (LTS) and two-point discrimination (2PD) were performed before, and at planned intervals until 18 months after the placement of one or two implants in the anterior maxilla. The same tests were used on the contralateral control sites. The psychophysical threshold was determined by performing the staircase method. The mean values and standard deviation of LTS and 2PD, pooled over the four sessions at each test area, were calculated. Despite a large intersubject variation in both the LTS and 2PD, significantly high intra-individual correlations were found (P < 0.005). For LTS, the thresholds were not significantly affected over time (P > 0.05) on both implant and control sites. The 2PD increased significantly after surgery and maintained the higher discriminatory sense for 1 year (P-value 0.005). The control sites remained stable over time. However, no correlation was revealed between LTS and 2PD perception (Pearson correlation test). In this prospective study, no major differences between the different sites and testing sessions were reported; except for the 2PD thresholds which were lowered after implant surgery. These findings suggest that the regenerated nerves may be responsible for the increased 2PD sensitivity in the peri-implant soft tissue. The unchanged LTS thresholds did not allow confirming this hypothesis.

Subgingival air‐polishing in the treatment of periodontal biofilm infections

“…Perhaps the peri‐implant soft tissue is even more vulnerable to mechanical forces than periodontal tissues, because intercellular spaces in the peri‐implant epithelium are wider and possibly less resistant to mechanical forces (15, 34). Also, the peri‐implant mucosa has been shown to be highly sensitive to mechanical stimuli (37, 95) and therefore application of sodium bicarbonate air‐polishing may be perceived to be painful by patients who are not given anesthetic.…”

Do sensation differences exist between dental implants and natural teeth?: a meta‐analysis

“…; Habre‐Hallage et al. ). Implant sensation should be an important consideration in occlusal contact designs for implant‐supported prostheses, because overstressing the implants may result in implant failures.…”

Osseoperception following dental implant treatment: A systematic review

“…Psychophysical evidence has been mainly derived from the evaluation of either ATS 30,32,[34][35][36] or PTS. 2,36,[38][39][40]44 The threshold level of ATS and PTS were found to be 5 and 50 times higher for implants compared to natural teeth, respectively. This large discrepancy could be attributed to the fact that during active occluding threshold determination, various mechanoreceptors are activated (periodontal, muscular, mucosal periosteal, joint-related), while for PTS only low-threshold cutaneous mechanoreceptors (bony and periosteal) are activated by the tactile touch stimuli.…”

“…The threshold level of ATS was recorded and ranged between 20 and 150 µm depending on the dental status, with a 2-5 times increased threshold for implants compared to natural teeth. [29][30][31][32][33][34][35] In another six articles, 2,[36][37][38][39][40] pressure was manually or semi-automatically exerted on natural teeth and implant-supported prostheses, and the threshold of passive tactile sensibility (PTS) revealed an up to 50 times higher threshold level for implants (force = 100 g) compared to natural teeth (force = 2 g). Overall, implant-supported prosthesis showed higher tactile force threshold level compared to natural teeth but remained more sensitive than the non-implant-supported prosthesis.…”