The Impact of Residual Subgingival Cement on Biological Complications Around Dental Implants

Quaranta, A. Alberigi; Lim, Zhuo Wei; Tang, Joyce; Perrotti, Vittoria; Leichter, Jonathan W.

doi:10.1097/id.0000000000000593

Cited by 29 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Accord i ng to t he l iterat u re, a mong a l l prosthesis-associated factors considered possible risk indicators for peri-implantitis only three are considered relevant, including: prosthetic rehabilitation extension, 26,58 excess of cement, 59,60,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71 and implant-abutment connection type. 72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82,83…”

Section: Prosthesis-associated Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…70 A recent systematic review recommends the use of zinc oxide eugenol cements in patients with a history of periodontitis instead of resin cements. 71 The excess cement may be considered an iatrogenic factor that may influence the onset and progression of peri-implantitis. The signs and symptoms of inflammation recede after removal of excess cement.…”

Section: Excess Of Cementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Implant-based factor as possible risk for peri-implantitis

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Peri-implantitis is currently a topic of major interest in implantology. Considered one of the main reasons of late implant failure, there is an emerged concern whether implant characteristics could trigger inflammatory lesion and loss of supporting bone. The purpose of this narrative review is to provide an evidence based overview on the influence of implant-based factors in the occurrence of peri-implantitis. A literature review was conducted addressing the following topics: implant surface topography; implant location; occlusal overload; time in function; prosthesis-associated factors (rehabilitation extension, excess of cement and implant-abutment connection); and metal particle release. Although existing data suggests that some implant-based factors may increase the risk of peri-implantitis, the evidence is still limited to consider them a true risk factor for peri-implantitis. In conclusion, further evidences are required to a better understanding of the influence of implant-based factors in the occurrence of peri-implantitis. Large population-based studies including concomitant analyses of implant-and patient-based factors are required to provide strong evidence of a possible association with peri-implantitis in a higher probability. The identification of these factors is essential for the establishment of strategies to prevent peri-implantitis.

show abstract

Section: Prosthesis-associated Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Excess Of Cementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implant-based factor as possible risk for peri-implantitis

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Peri-implantitis, an inflammatory destruction of the tissues around the implant, is a big clinical problem in dentistry. Colonization of bacterial biofilm on dental implant surface is scientifically accepted as the main reason for peri-implantitis [ 2 , 3 ]. Hence, most of the treatments for peri-implantitis are based on the treatment of periodontitis [ 4 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigation of different electrochemical cleaning methods on contaminated healing abutments in vitro: an approach for metal surface decontamination

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background To evaluate the effects of electrolysis on cleaning the contaminated healing abutment surface and to detect the optimal condition for cleaning the contaminated healing abutment. Methods Ninety healing abutments removed from patients were placed in 1% sodium dodecyl sulfate solution and randomly divided for electrolysis with 7.5% sodium bicarbonate in the following three different apparatuses (N = 30): two stainless steel electrodes (group I), a copper electrode and a carbon electrode (group II), and two carbon electrodes (group III). The samples were placed on cathode or anode with different electric current (0.5, 1, and 1.5 A) under constant 10 V for 5 min. Electrolyte pH before and after electrolysis were measured. Then, the samples were stained with phloxine B and photographed. The proportion of stained areas was calculated. The surface was examined with a scanning electron microscope (SEM) and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS). Results Electrolyte pH decreased after electrolysis at 1 A and 1.5 A in group I and II. Applying cathode at 1 A in group III, the amount of residual contamination was the lowest in all the conditions examined in the present study. SEM images revealed that applying cathode at 1.5 A in group I induced a rough surface from the smooth surface before the treatment. EDS analysis confirmed that the surfaces treated on cathode at 1 A in group III revealed no signs of organic contamination. Conclusion Electrolysis of using carbon as electrodes, placing the contaminated healing abutments on cathode, and applying the electric current of 1 A at constant 10 V in 7.5% sodium bicarbonate could completely remove organic contaminants from the surfaces. This optimized electrochemical cleaning method seems to be well worth investigation for the clinical management of peri-implant infections.

show abstract

“…One of the causes for peri-implantitis is residual cement, particularly in patients with history of periodontitis (Linkevicius, Puisys, Vindasiute, Linkeviciene, & Apse, 2013;Quaranta, Lim, Tang, Perrotti, & Leichter, 2017). Optional reason for the superior results of group P is cement removal, achieved in the suggested protocol in the phase of soft tissue curettage with rotatory hand piece composed of chitosan bristle.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A nonsurgical treatment of peri‐implantitis using mechanic, antiseptic and anti‐inflammatory treatment: 1 year follow‐up

Mayer

Ginesin

Horwitz

2020

Clinical & Exp Dental Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims The study's aim was to assess the clinical outcome 6 and 12 months after a nonsurgical treatment of peri‐implantitis per se or in conjunction with a combination of local antiseptic and anti‐inflammatory treatment. Materials and methods Included were 69 patients with periodontitis, with 106 implants, diagnosed with peri‐implantitis. Peri‐implantitis was defined as radiographic bone loss ≥3 mm, probing depth (PD) ≥ 6 mm, with bleeding on probing. Group M peri‐implantitis was treated with ultrasonic debridement and soft tissue curettage. Group P had additional implant surface treatment with rotatory hand piece composed of chitosan bristle, soft tissue curettage combined with application of 0.95% hypochlorite and 1 mg minocycline HCl. Results After 6 months, both groups demonstrated significant reduction of mean plaque index, PD, and clinical attachment level (0.71 ± 0.57, 0.81 ± 0.55; 4.77 ± 0.73 mm, 4.42 ± 0.5 mm; 5.03 ± 0.86 mm, 5.13 ± 0.73 mm; respectively) and bleeding on probing. After 6 and 12 months, group P showed significantly better PD results compared to group M. The bleeding was significantly less in group P after 12 months (15.3% ± 6.2, 25.1% ± 8.2, respectively). Conclusions Adjunctive treatment with local antiseptic and anti‐inflammatories during mechanical phase was positively associated with inflammation reduction and connective tissue reattachment.

show abstract

The Impact of Residual Subgingival Cement on Biological Complications Around Dental Implants

Cited by 29 publications

References 23 publications

Implant-based factor as possible risk for peri-implantitis

Implant-based factor as possible risk for peri-implantitis

Investigation of different electrochemical cleaning methods on contaminated healing abutments in vitro: an approach for metal surface decontamination

A nonsurgical treatment of peri‐implantitis using mechanic, antiseptic and anti‐inflammatory treatment: 1 year follow‐up

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About