Periimplant Disease and Prosthetic Risk Indicators

Serino, Giovanni; Hultin, Kristina

doi:10.1097/id.0000000000000841

Cited by 35 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The present study presupposed that removal of the suprastructure from the implants for a more straightforward accessibility of the implant surface is possible. Otherwise poorer results due to the limited accessibility may have been achieved [43]. In everyday clinical practice, missing removability of a cemented suprastructure should be considered.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In vitro surgical and non-surgical air-polishing efficacy for implant surface decontamination in three different defect configurations

Tuchscheerer¹,

Eickholz

Dannewitz

et al. 2020

Clin Oral Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Evaluation of surgical and non-surgical air-polishing in vitro efficacy for implant surface decontamination. Material and methods One hundred eighty implants were distributed to three differently angulated bone defect models (30°, 60°, 90°). Biofilm was imitated using indelible red color. Sixty implants were used for each defect, 20 of which were air-polished with three different types of glycine air powder abrasion (GAPA1-3) combinations. Within 20 equally air-polished implants, a surgical and non-surgical (with/without mucosa mask) procedure were simulated. All implants were photographed to determine the uncleaned surface. Changes in surface morphology were assessed using scanning electron micrographs (SEM). Results Cleaning efficacy did not show any significant differences between GAPA1-3 for surgical and non-surgical application. Within a cleaning method significant (p < 0.001) differences for GAPA2 between 30°(11.77 ± 2.73%) and 90°(7.25 ± 1.42%) in the non-surgical and 30°(8.26 ± 1.02%) and 60°(5.02 ± 0.84%) in the surgical simulation occurred. The surgical use of air-polishing (6.68 ± 1.66%) was significantly superior (p < 0.001) to the non-surgical (10.13 ± 2.75%). SEM micrographs showed no surface damages after use of GAPA. Conclusions Air-polishing is an efficient, surface protective method for surgical and non-surgical implant surface decontamination in this in vitro model. No method resulted in a complete cleaning of the implant surface. Clinical relevance Air-polishing appears to be promising for implant surface decontamination regardless of the device.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In vitro surgical and non-surgical air-polishing efficacy for implant surface decontamination in three different defect configurations

Tuchscheerer¹,

Eickholz

Dannewitz

et al. 2020

Clin Oral Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The most common local risk factors of peri-implant diseases include poor plaque control and habitual tobacco-smoking. 1,3 Customarily, debridement of implant surfaces and surrounding tissues is done to manage PiM 4 ; however, studies 4,5 have shown that mechanical debridement (MD) when performed with adjunct probiotic therapy (PT) is further effectual in managing PiM compared with MD alone.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of mechanical debridement with adjunctive probiotic therapy in the treatment of peri‐implant mucositis in cigarette‐smokers and never‐smokers

Alqahtani

Shafqat

et al. 2019

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Efficacy of mechanical debridement (MD) with adjunctive probiotic therapy (PT) in the treatment of peri-implant mucositis (PiM) in cigarette-smoking and never-smoking subjects remains uninvestigated.Purpose: The aim was to assess the efficacy of MD with adjunctive PT in the treatment of PiM in cigarette-smoking and never-smoking individuals.Materials and Methods: Patients with (group I) and without PiM (group II) were included. Demographic data was collected using a questionnaire. Treatment-wise, patients in groups I and II were subdivided into: (a) Patients that underwent MD with adjunct PT (using Lactobacillus reuteri); and (b) MD alone. In all groups, probing depth (PD), plaque index (PI), and bleeding on probing (BOP) were measured at baseline and compared after 3-and 6-months. Baseline peri-implant crestal bone levels were also measured. Sample-size estimation was performed, and statistical comparisons were done using one-way analysis of variance and Bonferroni post-hoc adjustment tests.P values under .05 were deemed significant.Results: Eighty individuals (group I: 40 cigarette-smokers and group II: 40 neversmokers) with PiM participated in this study. At all-time intervals, no significant difference in PD, PI, and BOP were observed in all patients in group I. At 3-months' follow-up, the differences in BOP (P < .05), and PI (P < .05) were significantly higher in group II that underwent MD + PT than MD alone. At 6-months' follow-up, there was no difference in the changes in BOP and PI among subjects that underwent MD with and without adjunct PT.Conclusion: On a short-term basis, MD with adjunct PT is more effectual in the treatment of PiM than MD alone in never-smokers. Cigarette-smoking compromises periimplant soft tissue healing following MD with or without adjunct PT. K E Y W O R D Sbleeding on probing, cigarette smoking, dental implant, inflammation, Lactobacillus reuteri, probiotics

show abstract

“…3 The transition from peri-implant mucositis toperi-implantitis is the result of changes in the pathogenicpotential of dental plaque, inappropriate or inadequate host response to the infection, and various risk factors (e.g., systemic diseases, stress, age, medications, lack of oral hygiene maintenance, poor diet). [4][5][6][7][8][9] Immuno competent cells produce inflammatory mediators leading to destruction of collagen, connective tissue matrix, and bone. 2 Associations have been detected between periodontal disease (PD) and increased circulating concentrations of inflammatory mediators and acute-phase proteins, systemic endothelial dysfunction, atherosclerosis, acute myocardial infarction, multiple complications of pregnancy, and diabetes mellitus.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of peri‐implant infection on serum biochemical analysis

Chaushu

Tal

Sculean

et al. 2020

Journal of Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Peri-implant disease (PID) has not been directly linked to pathological organ changes. The present study assessed the dynamics of serum biochemical parameters in a model of experimental peri-implantitis in dogs, followed by open flap debridement. Methods: Seven male beagle dogs comprised the study group. Procedures were performed as follows-extractions of two premolars and one molar on each mandibular quadrant (Day 0); bone healing time (week14); placement of four rough-surface endoosseous implants, two on each mandibular side; implant uncovering (week 28); induction of experimental peri-implantitis by the use of three ligatures (weeks 31, 34, 37) followed by open flap debridement (week 42). Serum biochemical analysis following each procedure was compared to baseline. Biochemical parameters were assigned into four subsets of variablesinflammation, renal function, liver function, and blood glucose. Wilcoxon paired tests were conducted in order to identify statistically significant differences between baseline data and values obtained after each procedure Results: Following experimental peri-implantitis, the dynamics of renal parameters and blood glucose were minimal whereas statistically significant (P < 0.05) increases were noted for inflammatory (total protein and albumin concentrations) and hepatic (ALT, AST) parameters. A statistically significant (P < 0.05) decrease was only noted for total bilirubin. After open flap debridement, inflammatory (total protein and albumin concentrations) and hepatic (AST) parameters returned to baseline. Conclusions: Within their limits, the present results indicate that: (a) PID affects inflammatory and hepatic serum biochemical parameters, and (b) following open flap debridement most of the values returned to baseline.

show abstract

Periimplant Disease and Prosthetic Risk Indicators

Cited by 35 publications

References 17 publications

In vitro surgical and non-surgical air-polishing efficacy for implant surface decontamination in three different defect configurations

In vitro surgical and non-surgical air-polishing efficacy for implant surface decontamination in three different defect configurations

Efficacy of mechanical debridement with adjunctive probiotic therapy in the treatment of peri‐implant mucositis in cigarette‐smokers and never‐smokers

Effects of peri‐implant infection on serum biochemical analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About