Knowledge and Attitude of Iranian Dentists towards Peri-implant Diseases

Abstract

Background. Despite successful results of implant therapy, complications occasionally occur in challenging situations.Apart from academic courses for implantology, dental associations also offer training courses for general practitioners.We sought to assess dentists' attitude towards peri-implant diseases. Methods. The subjects in thisquestionnaire-based cross-sectional study consisted of dentists participating in the annual congress of the Iranian Dental Association in 2013, whose knowledge and attitudes towards peri-implant diseases were assessed using a five-section questionnaire (implant therapy training, peri-implant soft tissue assessment, peri-implant diseases and treatment planning for peri-implant diseases). Data were analyzedwith SPSS 22, using descriptive and analytical methods. Results. The results showed that due to extensive placement of implants and high prevalence of complications, academic and organized training courses are essential. Conclusion. The results showed that due to extensive placement of implants and high prevalence of complications, academic and organized training courses are essential.

Diagnostic Principles of Peri-Implantitis: a Systematic Review and Guidelines for Peri-Implantitis Diagnosis Proposal

“…Four of the included studies were papers from consensus conferences [18-20,23]; two of them suggested diagnostic guidelines [24,25], three authors suggested the classification of peri-implantitis [3,21,26], and another suggested the index of implant success (Table 1) [22]. …”

“…In cases of failure the implant presents pain, exudate, mobility, and bone loss > 1/2 the length of the implant. Kadkhodazadeh et al [22] presented the implant success index, a scoring system to evaluate the clinical outcomes of dental implants that includes the evaluation of soft-tissue level, PD, BOP, hard-tissue level, and radiographic bone loss detected via a long-cone parallel periapical technique. According to these evaluations, implants may be classified into eight groups: clinically healthy, soft-tissue inflammation, deep soft-tissue pockets (PD > 4 mm), initiation of hard-tissue breakdown, hard-tissue breakdown plus soft-tissue recession, notable hard-tissue breakdown, notable hard-tissue breakdown plus soft-tissue recession, severe bone loss, and clinical failure implants presenting with mobility (Table 1) [22].…”

“…Five articles suggested evaluating implant mobility [18,19,22,24,25]. All authors agreed that implant mobility indicates the final stage of peri-implant disease, characterized by complete loss of the direct bone-to-implant interface [18,19,22,24,25].…”

“…According to different authors, different thresholds are referred to as peri-implantitis: > 6 mm PD [25]; ≥ 4 mm initial peri-implantitis, ≥ 6 mm moderate peri-implantitis, and ≥ 8 mm severe peri-implantitis [21]; < 4 mm pockets indicate soft-tissue inflammation and > 4 mm soft-tissue pockets [22]. …”

“…The implant success index by Kadhazahed et al [22] reported that ≤ 2 mm (≤ 20%) of bone loss indicated the initiation of hard-tissue breakdown, 2 - 4 mm (< 40%) indicated hard-tissue breakdown, and > 40% indicated severe bone loss. Ata-Ali et al [26] suggested using different stages of peri-implantitis based on the amount of marginal bone loss beyond biological bone remodelling (Stage I: ≤ 3 mm; Stage II: > 3 mm but < 5 mm; Stage III: ≥ 5 mm; Stage IV: ≥ 50% of the implant length).…”