Association between diabetes mellitus/hyperglycaemia and peri‐implant diseases: Systematic review and meta‐analysis

Monje, Alberto; Catena, Andrés; Borgnakke, Wenche S.

doi:10.1111/jcpe.12724

Cited by 221 publications

(201 citation statements)

References 80 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

183

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…9,10,12,25 In the following step (Model 3), the relevant variables of osteoporosis, Eichner index, bruxism, jaw position, surgical procedure, GBR, fixation method, connection type, KMW, and superstructure design were added. The explanatory variables were input to each model according to the following steps.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…9,10,12,25 It has been reported that implant treatment for patients with well-controlled diabetes can be acceptable. 9,10,12,25 It has been reported that implant treatment for patients with well-controlled diabetes can be acceptable.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4 Thus, marginal bone stability is considered one of the most important issues in implant dentistry. [11][12][13][14] Additionally, occlusal overload is considered to be associated with periimplant bone resorption. 9,10 The associations between various factors such as systemic diseases, implant position, prosthetic design, implant connection types, and marginal bone resorption are also being examined.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Risk indicators for marginal bone resorption around implants in function for at least 4 years: A retrospective longitudinal study

Mameno

Wada

Otsuki

et al. 2019

Journal of Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Marginal bone stability is considered one of the most important issues in implant dentistry. It is essential to understand how various factors influence bone resorption around implants. The purpose of this retrospective longitudinal study was to identify potential risk indicators associated with marginal bone resorption around implants in function for at least 4 years. Methods Several systemic‐related, intraoral‐related, implant‐related factors were collected. Marginal bone level change (MBLC) was determined by comparing intraoral radiographs taken at baseline (1 year after prosthesis delivery), and at follow‐up (over 3 years from baseline). A hierarchical regression analysis using liner mixed‐effects models was performed to examine correlations between MBLC and various factors. Results Overall, 514 patients with 1535 implants were analyzed. The mean age of the participants was 62.9 years. Mean annual MBLC was 0.048 mm, and mean functional time was 5.96 years. The result showed that the following explanatory variables had significant effects on MBLC: functional time, plaque control record > 20%, Eichner index C1‐3, maxilla, cement‐retained superstructure, and keratinized mucosa width < 2 mm. We did not find statistically significant associations between bone resorption and some variables known as risk factors, such as diabetes, smoking, and history of periodontitis. Conclusions Within the limits of this study, longer functional time, poor oral hygiene, loss of occlusal support, location in the maxilla, cement‐retained superstructure, and less keratinized mucosa should be considered as risk indicators for bone resorption around implants.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Risk indicators for marginal bone resorption around implants in function for at least 4 years: A retrospective longitudinal study

Mameno

Wada

Otsuki

et al. 2019

Journal of Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When the patient is well‐controlled, implant survival is comparable to that of healthy subjects; peri‐implant health is good and peri‐implant bone loss is comparable to controls (Abduljabbar, Javed, Malignaggi, Vohra, & Kellesarian, ; Al Amri et al., , ; de Araújo Nobre, Maló, Gonçalves, Sabas, & Salvado, ; Kotsakis et al., ; Monje, Catena, & Borgnakke, ; Shi, Xu, Huo, Cai, & Liu, ). In subjects with hyperglycemia, that is, less well‐controlled diabetics, the risk of developing peri‐implantitis has been shown to be increased (Monje et al., ; Turri et al., ), although other studies did not observe such an effect (Eskow & Oates, ). Antibiotic prophylaxis is recommended in diabetic patients, in particular for patients with higher glycemic levels.…”

Section: Diabetes Mellitusmentioning

confidence: 97%

The medically compromised patient: Are dental implants a feasible option?

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In healthy subjects, dental implants have evolved to be a common therapy to solve problems related to stability and retention of dentures as well as to replace failing teeth. Although dental implants are applied in medically compromised patients, it is often not well known whether this therapy is also feasible in these patients, whether the risk of implant failure and developing peri-implantitis is increased, and what specific preventive measures, if any, have to be taken when applying dental implants in these patients. Generally speaking, as was the conclusion by the leading review of Diz, Scully, and Sanz on placement of dental implants in medically compromised patients (J Dent, 41, 2013, 195), in a few disorders implant survival may be lower, and the risk of a compromised peri-implant health and its related complications be greater, but the degree of systemic disease control outweighs the nature of the disorder rather than the risk accompanying dental implant treatment. So, as dental implant treatment is accompanied by significant functional benefits and improved oral health-related quality of life, dental implant therapy is a feasible treatment in almost any medically compromised patient when the required preventive measures are taken and follow-up care is at a high level.

show abstract

“…Their findings have led to a more rigorous and open scientific investigation of the impact systemic factors have on implant therapy success. It is a positive sign that several recent investigations have begun to focus not only on implant survival, but also on implant‐related biologic complications, including long‐term implant maintenance and the potential consequences of implant therapy under function within the oral environment (Table ) . Recent systematic reviews have begun to address the potential for long‐term implant sequelae associated with diabetes (Table ) .…”

Section: The Impact Of Glycemic Control On Successful Implant Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advances in implant therapy in North America: Improved outcomes and application in the compromised dentition

Saito

Aichelmann-Reidy

Oates

2019

Periodontology 2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Advances in dental implant therapy have strengthened our understanding of the management of the implant‐soft tissue interface, with site‐specific implications ranging from marginal tissue management and esthetics to immediate placement and restoration, and extend to patient‐level implications of systemic conditions. The advancements in implant therapy have placed an increased emphasis on patient‐centered outcomes. In this paper, the following conclusions can be drawn: improvements in both esthetics and long‐term maintenance have been guided by the study of the marginal peri‐implant tissues leading to innovations in implant design along the implant‐abutment interface. Patient expectations for simple and realistic time intervals for treatment have promoted the use of immediate implant placement and restoration. The expansion of implant therapy offers implant options for patients with medical conditions, with one in particular, diabetes mellitus a focus of this paper. Studies on patients with diabetes are supporting the development of evidence‐based treatment considerations with broader application and greater benefits for the use of implant therapy across a larger patient population. This paper is not intended to offer a comprehensive review, but offers a representative review of some of the many contributions of USA and North American clinicians to the global scientific dialogue that has guided the development of dental implant therapy.

show abstract

Association between diabetes mellitus/hyperglycaemia and peri‐implant diseases: Systematic review and meta‐analysis

Abstract: Within its limits that demand great caution when interpreting its findings, this systematic review suggests that diabetes mellitus/hyperglycaemia is associated with greater risk of peri-implantitis, independently of smoking, but not with peri-implant mucositis.

Cited by 221 publications

References 80 publications

Risk indicators for marginal bone resorption around implants in function for at least 4 years: A retrospective longitudinal study

Risk indicators for marginal bone resorption around implants in function for at least 4 years: A retrospective longitudinal study

The medically compromised patient: Are dental implants a feasible option?

Advances in implant therapy in North America: Improved outcomes and application in the compromised dentition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About