Non-surgical mechanical therapy of peri-implantitis with or without repeated adjunctive diode laser application. A 6-month double-blinded randomized clinical trial

The clinical efficacy of powder air-polishing in the non-surgical treatment of peri-implant diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Peri-implant diseases, characterized by inflammatory conditions affecting peri-implant tissues, encompass peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. Peri-implant mucositis is an inflammatory lesion limited to the mucosa around an implant, while peri-implantitis extends from the mucosa to the supporting bone, causing a loss of osseointegration. For non-surgical treatments, we tested the null hypothesis that the presence or absence of air-polishing made no difference. The study focused on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing air-polishing with mechanical or ultrasonic debridement, evaluating outcomes such as bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), plaque index/plaque score (PI/PS), clinical attachment level (CAL), bone loss, and mucosal recession (MR). Two independent reviewers conducted data extraction and quality assessments, considering short-term (<6 months) and long-term (≥6 months) follow-up periods. After screening, ten articles were included in the meta-analysis. In nonsurgical peri-implant disease management, air-polishing moderately mitigated short-term PI/PS for peri-implant mucositis and showed a similar improvement in long-term BOP and bone loss for peri-implantitis compared to the control group. The Egger test found no evidence of publication bias except for the long-term PI/PS of peri-implant mucositis. Leave-one-out analysis confirmed the stability of the results. The findings highlight the need for future research with longer-term follow-up and high-quality, multi-center, large-sample RCTs.

Periodontal conditions of teeth adjacent to dental implants with or without peri-implantitis after non-surgical therapy in patients treated for periodontitis: A retrospective study

OBJECTIVES

To retrospectively assess the periodontal conditions of teeth adjacent to and contralateral to implants presenting with or without peri-implantitis, following non-surgical periodontal and peri-implant mechanical therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred and one patients with existing dental implants and chronic periodontitis, who underwent non-surgical periodontal and peri-implant mechanical therapy, were included. The periodontal clinical probing depth (PPD), gingival recession (GR), and bleeding on probing (BOP) were recorded at six sites around the adjacent (Adj-) teeth and the contralateral (CL-) teeth relative to the implant. The potential factors influencing the periodontal conditions of 316 teeth were analyzed by multivariate linear regression models with generalized estimating equation methods and α = .05.

RESULTS

The PPD of Adj-teeth was significantly different from that of CL-teeth before and after non-surgical therapy when the implant was diagnosed with peri-implantitis (PI) (p < .05). The PPD of teeth was shown to be affected by neighboring implants diagnosed with peri-implantitis (β = .825 mm, p < .001), teeth adjacent to implants (β = .245 mm, p = .004), a molar tooth type (β = .435 mm, p = .019), and non-surgical therapy (β = -.522 mm, p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Relatively compromised periodontal conditions at Adj-teeth after non-surgical PI therapy were detected. Therefore, clinicians should be aware that non-surgical therapy may be less successful at teeth adjacent to implants with PI.

Treatment of peri-implantitis with a flapless surgical access combined with implant surface decontamination and adjunctive systemic antibiotics: A retrospective case series study

AIM

To evaluate the effectiveness of a flapless surgical approach in the treatment of peri-implantitis and to explore the factors influencing its outcome.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The present retrospective study evaluated patients with at least one implant diagnosed with peri-implantitis and treated with a flapless surgical access, with or without systemic antimicrobials, curettage and, when needed, prostheses modification. Clinical and radiographic parameters were assessed at baseline and at 3 months and at least 12 months. The primary outcome was disease resolution (≤1 bleeding sites, probing depth [PD] ≤5 mm, no bone loss >0.5 mm). Multilevel regression analyses were used to identify predictors influencing the probability of attaining disease resolution.

RESULTS

One hundred and seventeen patients with 338 implants were included. Disease resolution was attained in 54.4% of the 338 implants receiving flapless surgical access. At the end of the follow-up period, 111 patients (94.9%) with 295 implants (87.3%) did not require any further treatment, with 81.4% of these implants presenting PD ≤ 5 mm. History of periodontitis and PD at baseline were identified as negative predictors, while compliance with supportive peri-implant care, a machined surface and the adjunctive use of systemic azithromycin or metronidazole were identified as positive predictive factors for disease resolution.

CONCLUSIONS

A flapless surgical approach led to disease resolution in 54.4% of the implants with peri-implantitis. Several risk/protective predictors for disease resolution were identified.

Surgical treatment of peri-implantitis

As utilisation of dental implants continues to rise, so does the incidence of biological complications. When peri-implantitis has already caused extensive bone resorption, the dentist faces the dilemma of which therapy is the most appropriate to maintain the implant. Since non-surgical approaches of peri-implantitis have shown limited effectiveness, the present paper describes different surgical treatment modalities, underlining their indications and limitations. The primary goal in the management of peri-implantitis is to decontaminate the surface of the infected implant and to eliminate deep peri-implant pockets. For this purpose, access flap debridement, with or without resective procedures, has shown to be effective in a large number of cases. These surgical treatments, however, may be linked to post-operative recession of the mucosal margin. In addition to disease resolution, reconstructive approaches also seek to regenerate the bone defect and to achieve re-osseointegration.

BSP Implementation of Prevention and Treatment of Peri-implant Diseases - The EFP S3 Level Clinical Practice Guideline

OBJECTIVES

to adapt the supranational European Federation of Periodontology (EFP) Prevention and Treatment of Peri-implant Diseases - The EFP S3 Level Clinical Practice Guideline for UK healthcare environment, taking into account a broad range of views from stakeholders and patients.

SOURCES

This UK version, based on the supranational EFP guideline [1] published in the Journal of Clinical Periodontology, was developed using S3-level methodology, combining assessment of formal evidence from 13 systematic reviews with a moderated consensus process of a representative group of stakeholders, and accounts for health equality, environmental factors and clinical effectiveness. It encompasses 55 clinical recommendations for the Prevention and Treatment of Peri-implant Diseases, based on the classification for periodontal and peri-implant diseases and conditions [2].

METHODOLOGY

The UK version was developed from the source guideline using a formal process called the GRADE ADOLOPMENT framework. This framework allows for adoption (unmodified acceptance), adaptation (acceptance with modifications) and the de novo development of clinical recommendations. Using this framework, following the S3-process, the underlying evidence was updated and a representative guideline group of 111 delegates from 26 stakeholder organisations was assembled into four working groups. Following the formal S3-process, all clinical recommendations were formally assessed for their applicability to the UK and adoloped accordingly.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Using the ADOLOPMENT protocol, a UK version of the EFP S3-level clinical practice guideline for the Prevention and Treatment of Peri-implant Diseases was developed. This guideline delivers evidence- and consensus-based clinical recommendations of direct relevance to the UK healthcare community including the public.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The S3-level-guidelines combine evaluation of formal evidence, grading of recommendations and synthesis with clinical expertise of a broad range of stakeholders. The international S3-level-guideline was implemented for direct clinical applicability in the UK healthcare system, facilitating a consistent, interdisciplinary, evidence-based approach with public involvement for the prevention and treatment of peri-implant diseases.

Comparative effectiveness of interventions for the treatment of peri-implantitis: A systematic review with network meta-analysis

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Extensive research has been carried out on the various aspects of diagnosing and treating peri-implantitis. However, clinical guidelines for the management of peri-implantitis based on high quality evidence are lacking.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review with network meta-analysis was to analyze the current evidence on nonsurgical and surgical interventions for the treatment of peri-implantitis and synthesize clinical guidelines based on high quality evidence.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A search was conducted for trials published in Medline, Scopus, PubMed, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception until July 2023. The study was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (CRD42023451056). A network meta-analysis was performed on data from randomized controlled trials that assessed nonsurgical and surgical interventions for the treatment of peri-implantitis. The interventions were ranked according to their efficacy using surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) system. The grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluations (GRADE) approach was used to assess the level of certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 45 articles were included in the quantitative analysis. The GRADE approach determined a moderate to high level of certainty of evidence. Among the nonsurgical interventions, mechanical debridement with adjunctive systemic antibiotics was significant in improving probing depth at 3 months and beyond 6 months, clinical attachment loss at 3 months, and clinical attachment loss beyond 6 months. Mechanical debridement with adjunctive topical antibiotics was significant in improving probing depth beyond 6 months, clinical attachment loss at 3 months, clinical attachment loss beyond 6 months, and radiographic bone loss beyond 6 months. Mechanical debridement with adjunctive photodynamic therapy was significant in improving probing depth beyond 6 months, clinical attachment loss at 3 months, clinical attachment loss beyond 6 months, and radiographic bone loss beyond 6 months. Mechanical debridement with adjunctive systemic antibiotics and photodynamic therapy was significant in improving probing depth beyond 6 months. Among surgical interventions, open flap debridement with implant surface decontamination and open flap debridement with decontamination and adjunctive photodynamic therapy were significant in improving probing depth at 3 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Mechanical debridement with adjunctive systemic antibiotics or photodynamic therapy results in improved clinical outcomes.

Evaluation of the effect of Er,Cr:YSGG laser application on peri-implant crevicular fluid receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappa B ligand and osteoprotegerin levels in the non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis: A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to investigate the effect of erbium, chromium doped:yttrium,scandium,gallium,garnet (Er,Cr:YSGG) laser application combined with non-surgical mechanical debridement (MD) on clinical parameters and peri-implant crevicular fluid receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappa B ligand (RANKL) and osteoprotegerin (OPG) levels in the treatment of peri-implantitis.

METHODS

A total of 49 patients who underwent non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis were randomly divided into two groups. The control group (n = 26) received MD alone, while the laser group (n = 23) received MD+Er,Cr:YSGG. The clinical parameters (bleeding on probing [BoP], gingival index [GI], plaque index [PI], probing depth [PD]), marginal bone loss (MBL), and biochemical parameters (RANKL and OPG) were measured at baseline (T0) and 6 months after treatment (T1).

RESULTS

There was a statistically significant decrease in all the clinical parameters in both groups at T1 compared to T0 (p < 0.05). The BoP, PD, MBL, and RANKL reductions were significantly higher in the laser group than in the control group (p = 0.046, p = 0.014, p = 0.047, p = 0.045, respectively). The OPG levels significantly increased at T1 in the laser group (p = 0.01). The OPG/RANKL ratio increased significantly in both groups at T1, which favored the laser group (p = 0.034).

CONCLUSIONS

Although both treatment methods were influential in treating peri-implantitis, the laser group (MD+Er,Cr:YSGG) yielded more favorable results by reducing clinical inflammation and improving biochemical parameters. Based on these findings, Er,Cr:YSGG laser may be a beneficial adjunctive treatment in this patient group.

Etiology, pathogenesis and treatment of peri-implantitis: A European perspective

Peri-implantitis is a plaque-associated pathological condition occurring in tissues around dental implants. It is characterized by inflammation in the peri-implant mucosa and progressive loss of supporting bone. Over the last 30 years, peri-implantitis has become a major disease burden in dentistry. An understanding of the diagnosis, etiology and pathogenesis, epidemiology, and treatment of peri-implantitis must be a central component in undergraduate and postgraduate training programs in dentistry. In view of the strong role of European research in periodontology and implant dentistry, the focus of this review was to address peri-implantitis from a European perspective. One component of the work was to summarize new and reliable data on patients with dental implants to underpin the relevance of peri-implantitis from a population perspective. The nature of the peri-implantitis lesion was evaluated through results presented in preclinical models and evaluations of human biopsy material together with an appraisal of the microbiological characteristics. An overview of strategies and outcomes presented in clinical studies on nonsurgical and surgical treatment of peri-implantitis is discussed with a particular focus on end points of therapy and recommendations presented in the S3 level Clinical Practice Guideline for the prevention and treatment of peri-implant diseases.

The Efficacy of Ten Different Adjunctive Measures in Patients with Nonsurgically Treated Peri-Implant Disease: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of 10 adjunctive measures on non-surgical therapy outcomes for peri-implant disease. Methods: We formulated the study question and keywords following the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome framework. Randomized controlled trials were identified through searches in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science. Two researchers assessed the quality of included literature according to the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Data analysis and ranking were performed using Stata 15.0 software. Results: This study, involving 51 pieces of literature and 2660 samples, conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA), which revealed that photodynamic therapy (PDT) significantly reduced probing pocket depth values in patients with peri-implant mucositis (SUCRA = 96.3%) and peri-implantitis (SUCRA = 96.7%). In addition, it showed an improvement in bleeding on probing (BOP) values for peri-implantitis (SUCRA = 91.6%). Furthermore, diode lasers improved BOP values for peri-implant mucositis (SUCRA = 76.5%). Conclusions: According to the NMA results and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), PDT and diode laser outperform other adjuncts in peri-implant disease.

Novel Flowchart Guiding the Non-Surgical and Surgical Management of Peri-Implant Complications: A Narrative Review

Peri-implant diseases, such as peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis, are induced by dysbiotic microbiota resulting in the inflammatory destruction of peri-implant tissue. Nonetheless, there has yet to be an established protocol for the treatment of these diseases in a predictable manner, although many clinicians and researchers have proposed various treatment modalities for their management. With the increase in the number of reports evaluating the efficacy of various treatment modalities and new materials, the use of multiple decontamination methods to clean infected implant surfaces is recommended; moreover, the use of hard tissue laser and/or air abrasion techniques may prove advantageous in the future. Limited evidence supports additional effects on clinical improvement in antimicrobial administration for treating peri-implantitis. Implantoplasty may be justified for decontaminating the implant surfaces in the supracrestal area. Surgical treatment is employed for advanced peri-implantitis, and appropriate surgical methods, such as resection therapy or combination therapy, should be selected based on bone defect configuration. This review presents recent clinical advances in debridement methods for contaminated implant surfaces and regenerative materials for treating peri-implant bone defects. It also proposes a new flowchart to guide the treatment decisions for peri-implant disease.

Influence of antiresorptive/antiangiogenic therapy on the surgical treatment outcomes of experimentally induced peri-implantitis lesions

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the influence of various antiresorptive and antiangiogenic medications on the resolution of experimentally induced peri-implantitis lesions after different surgical treatment approaches.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-eight albino rats randomly received a dual application of the following medications: (1) amino-bisphosphonate (zoledronate (Zo)) (n = 8), (2) RANKL inhibitor (denosumab (De)) (n = 8), (3) antiangiogenic (bevacizumab (Be)) (n = 8), (4) Zo + Be (n = 8), (5) De + Be (n = 8), or (6) no medication (control (Co)) (n = 8). Ligature-induced peri-implantitis lesions were established at 2 maxillary implants over 16 weeks. Afterward, animals were randomly treated either with open flap debridement (OFD) or reconstructive therapy (RT). Treatment procedures were followed by a 12-week healing period. The histological outcomes included residual defect length (DL); defect width (DW) at the bone crest (BC-DW); 25%, 50%, and 75% of the DL; and areas of inflammatory cell infiltrate (ICT). When present, areas of bone sequester (BS) were assessed considering the animal as a statistical unit.

RESULTS

A total of 21 animals were analyzed (Zo: RT = 3, OFD = 1; De: RT = 3, OFD = 2; Be: OFD = 1; Zo + Be: RT = 2, OFD = 2; Co: RT = 3, OFD = 2). Implant loss rates were comparable among the experimental groups. Except for the 25% and 75% DW values that were significantly higher in the Zo + Be group compared to the Co group (p = 0.04 and p = 0.03, respectively), no significant differences were found among the experimental groups for the DL (lowest-Be: 0.56 mm; highest-Co: 1.05 mm), BC-DW (lowest-De: 0.86 mm, highest-Co: 1.07 mm), 50% DW (lowest-De: 0.86 mm; highest-Be + Zo: 1.29 mm), and ICT (lowest-Be: 0.56 mm2; highest-Be + Zo: 1.65 mm2). All groups, except for the Zo and Be following RT, showed presence of BS.

CONCLUSIONS

The present findings did not reveal a marked effect of various antiresorptive/antiangiogenic medications on the resolution of experimentally induced peri-implantitis lesions, regardless of the surgical approach employed (OFD and RT).

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Resolution of peri-implantitis lesions may not be affected by the investigated antiresorptive/antiangiogenic medications.

Effects of enamel matrix derivative in nonsurgical periodontal therapy on pro-inflammatory profiles, microbial environment and clinical outcome: a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the impact of enamel matrix derivative (EMD) application following subgingival instrumentation of residual pockets in periodontitis patients on inflammatory host response, microbiological composition, and clinical outcome.

METHODS

In this double-blinded randomized controlled trial, a total of 22 patients with generalized periodontitis stage III or IV presenting with ≥ 6 mm probing pocket depth (PPD) at re-evaluation after initial periodontal therapy were included. Participants were randomly allocated at a 1:1 ratio to subgingival instrumentation with (EMD +) or without (EMD-) non-surgical EMD application into the pocket. PPD, clinical attachment level (CAL), bleeding on probing (BoP), plaque index (PI), as well as a panel of pro-inflammatory cytokines and periodontal pathogen count in the gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) of the respective sites were evaluated at baseline (T0) and six months afterwards (T1).

RESULTS

Both treatment groups showed a significant PPD reduction (EMD + 1.33 ± 1.15 mm, p < 0.001; EMD- 1.32 ± 1.01 mm, p < 0.001) as well as CAL gain (EMD + 1.13 ± 1.58 mm, p < 0.001; EMD- 0.47 ± 1.06 mm, p = 0.005) from T0 to T1. While no intergroup differences for PPD reduction were observed, CAL gain was higher in EMD + sites compared to EMD- (p = 0.009). No essential effects on cytokine expression as well as bacterial count were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Application of EMD as an adjunct to subgingival instrumentation of residual pockets yielded benefits regarding CAL gain; however, effects on PPD reduction, inflammatory cytokines, and bacterial count were negligible.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04449393), registration date 26/06/2020.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Based on the obtained results, additional non-surgical EMD application compared to subgingival instrumentation alone showed no clinically relevant effects on treatment outcome and underlying biological mechanisms.

Peri-implantitis and systemic inflammation: A critical update

Peri-implantitis is an inflammatory condition induced by bacterial biofilm that affects the soft and hard tissues surrounding dental implants, compromising the success of implant therapy. Recent studies have highlighted the potential links between peri-implant health and systemic inflammation, including uncontrolled diabetes mellitus, psychological stress, cardiovascular disease, obesity, and infectious diseases such as COVID-19. As an inflammatory disease, peri-implantitis may trigger systemic inflammation by elevating circulating levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines, which could have unknown impacts on overall health. While the relationship between periodontal health and systemic conditions is better understood, the association between peri-implant disease and systemic inflammation remains unclear. Therefore, this comprehensive review aims to summarize the most recent evidence on the relationship between peri-implantitis and systemic inflammation, focusing on biological complications, microbiology, and biomarkers. This review aims to enhance our understanding of the links between peri-implantitis and systemic inflammation and promote further research in this field by discussing the latest insights and clinical implications.

Clinical efficacy of adjunctive methods for the non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this systematic review (SR) was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of different adjunctive methods/therapies to the non-surgical treatment (NST) of peri-implantitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The protocol of the review was registered in PROSPERO database (CRD42022339709) and was designed according to PRISMA statement. Electronic and hand searches were performed to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis alone versus NST plus any adjunctive method/treatment. The primary outcome was probing pocket depth (PPD) reduction.

RESULTS

Sixteen RCTs were included. Only 2 out of 1189 implants were lost and follow-up ranged from 3 to 12 months. PPD reduction across the studies varied from 0.17 to 3.1 mm, while defect resolution from 5.3% to 57.1%. Systemic antimicrobials were associated to higher PPD reduction (1.56 mm; [95% CI 0.24 to 2.89]; p = 0.02) with high heterogeneity, and treatment success (OR = 3.23; [95% CI 1.17 to 8.94]; p = 0.02), compared to NST alone. No differences were found with adjunctive local antimicrobials and lasers for PPD and bleeding on probing (BoP) reduction.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-surgical treatment with or without adjunctive methods may reduce PPD and BoP even if complete resolution of the pocket is unpredictable. Among possible adjunctive methods, only systemic antibiotics seems to provide further benefits, but their usage should be considered with caution.

Efficacy of mechanical/physical approaches for implant surface decontamination in non-surgical submarginal instrumentation of peri-implantitis. A systematic review

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of non-surgical submarginal peri-implant instrumentation with mechanical/physical decontamination compared to non-surgical submarginal instrumentation alone or with placebo decontamination in patients with peri-implantitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three focused questions were addressed, and a systematic search for randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials, and prospective cohort studies with definitions of peri-implantitis and a minimal follow-up of 6 months was conducted. The main outcome variables were reduction in pocket probing depth (PD) and bleeding on probing (BOP). Suppuration on probing, marginal peri-implant bone level changes, patient-related outcomes and adverse events, implant survival, treatment success, and disease resolution were assessed as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Out of 239 findings, full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, and 9 (n = 9 RCTs) were included in the present review. Five studies evaluated the effects of various laser types, and in four studies efficacy of air-abrasive mechanisms and of a novel ultrasonic device was determined. At 6 months, PD reductions were observed in nine studies but only Er, Cr:YSGG laser-treated group showed statistically significant higher reductions compared to the control group. BOP was statistically significantly reduced at 6 months in two studies following the application of Er:YAG laser compared to controls. One study reported statistically significant reduction in BOP following application of air-polishing device compared to control treatment. No statistically significant differences between treatment groups were reported for the secondary outcome variables. Owing to the large heterogeneity of study designs, no meta-analysis was performed.

CONCLUSIONS

Available evidence on the efficacy of non-surgical submarginal peri-implant instrumentation with mechanical/physical decontamination is limited by the small number of controlled studies and the high heterogeneity of study protocols. Clinical and patient-reported benefits remain to be demonstrated.

Survival analysis of implants after surgical treatment of peri-implantitis based on bone loss severity and surgical technique: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Few trials have compared the results of surgical treatment for peri-implantitis based on severity of peri-implantitis and surgical method. This study investigated the survival rate of implants based on type of surgical method used and initial severity of peri-implantitis. Classification of severity was determined based on bone loss rate relative to fixture length.

METHODS

Medical records of patients who underwent peri-implantitis surgery from July 2003 to April 2021 were identified. Classification of peri-implantitis was divided into 3 groups (stage 1: bone loss < 25% (of fixture length), stage 2: 25% < bone loss < 50%, stage 3: bone loss > 50%) and performance of resective or regenerative surgery was investigated. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox hazards proportional models were used to analyze the cumulative survival rate of implants. Median survival time, predicted mean survival time, hazard ratio (HR), and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

Based on Kaplan-Meier analysis, 89 patients and 227 implants were included, and total median postoperative survival duration was 8.96 years. Cumulative survival rates for stage 1, 2, and 3 were 70.7%, 48.9%, and 21.3%, respectively. The mean survival time for implants in stage 1, 2, and 3 was 9.95 years, 7.96 years, and 5.67 years, respectively, with statistically significant difference (log-rank p-value < 0.001). HRs for stage 2 and stage 3 were 2.25 and 4.59, respectively, with stage 1 as reference. Significant difference was not found in survival time between resective and regenerative surgery groups in any peri-implantitis stage.

CONCLUSIONS

The initial bone loss rate relative to the fixture length significantly correlated with the outcome after peri-implantitis surgery, demonstrating a notable difference in the long-term survival rate. Difference was not found between resective surgery and regenerative surgery in implant survival time. Bone loss rate could be utilized as a reliable diagnostic tool for evaluating prognosis after surgical treatment, regardless of surgical method used.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Retrospectively registered. (KCT0008225).

Advanced and Readily-Available Wireless-Powered Blue-Light-Implant for Non-Invasive Peri-Implant Disinfection

Non-invasive light-based antibacterial therapy has a good prospect in non-surgical treatment of peri-implant infections. However, its applications are severely limited by poor penetration of light into human tissues, leading to unsatisfying outcomes. Moreover, as an essential prerequisite for traditional light therapy, lasers can no longer meet the patients' needs for convenient treatment at any time. To break through the spatial and temporal limitations of traditional light therapy, a wireless-powered blue-light zirconia implant for readily available treatment of peri-implant infection is proposed. In space, complete irradiation to complex peri-implant structure is realized by the built-in wireless-powered light source, thus improving the efficacy. In time, wireless-powering allows timely and controllable anti-infection treatment. Blue micro-light emitting diodes are used as therapeutic light sources, which effectively kill peri-implant infection-related bacteria without exogenous photosensitive agents. Porphyromonas gingivalis biofilm on implant surface can be completely killed after 20 min irradiation in vitro. The bactericidal rate of peri-implant methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection reaches 99.96 ± 0.03% under 30 min per day blue light exposure in vivo. Within the scope of this study, the treatment of peri-implant infection with blue-light implant has preliminary feasibility, giving a new approach to non-invasive treatment of deep oral infections, including peri-implant infections.

Non-Surgical Therapy and Oral Microbiota Features in Peri-Implant Complications: A Brief Narrative Review

The therapeutic discretion in cases of peri-implantitis should take into account the limits and advantages of specific therapeutic itineraries tailored according to each clinical case and each individual patient. This type of oral pathology emphasizes the complex classification and diagnostic issues coupled with the need for targeted treatments, in light of the oral peri-implant microbiota changes. This review highlights the current indications for the non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis, describing the specific therapeutic efficacy of different approaches and discussing the more appropriate application of single non-invasive therapies The non-surgical treatment choice with antiseptics or antibiotics (single or combined, local, or systemic) for short courses should be considered on a case-by-case basis to minimize the incidence of side effects and concomitantly avoid disease progression.

Outcome indicators of non-surgical therapy of peri-implantitis: a prospective case series analysis

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to identify patient and implant indicators influencing the non-surgical therapeutic outcomes of peri-implantitis at 6 months of follow-up.

METHODS

This case series involved patients with at least one implant diagnosed with peri-implantitis according to the 2017 World Workshop criteria. Non-surgical therapy consisted of mechanical debridement of the peri-implant pockets combined with metronidazole 500 mg 3 times a day for 7 days. At baseline and at 6 months, clinical and radiographic variables were collected to calculate treatment success (probing pocket depth reduction to 5 mm without bleeding on probing or < 5 mm irrespective of bleeding on probing at all implant sites, and lack of bone loss progression). The primary outcome was treatment success (%) at 6 months. The influence of the patient and implant/prosthetic variables upon disease resolution was assessed through simple and multiple logistic regression analyses at patient and implant level, using generalized estimation equations models.

RESULTS

A total of 74 patients and 107 implants were analyzed at 6 months. Disease resolution was established in 25.7% of the patients and 24.1% of the implants. Patients with stage IV and grade C periodontitis, inadequate oral hygiene at baseline, and wide diameter (≥ 4.5 mm) presented significantly greater treatment failure, whereas smokers and former smokers demonstrated a tendency toward failure. At 6 months, there was a significant decrease in probing pocket depth and bleeding on probing of 1.08 ± 1.06 mm and 14%, respectively. Radiographically, a significant gain in marginal bone level of 0.43 ± 0.56 mm was observed.

CONCLUSION

Disease resolution after non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis is negatively influenced by the loss of support of the adjacent periodontium, poor baseline oral hygiene, and wide diameter implants (≥ 4.5 mm).

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This study helps to discriminate the clinical situations in which non-surgical treatment is less likely to achieve treatment success at short term.

Soft tissue features of peri‐implant diseases and related treatment

BACKGROUND

The need for soft tissue grafting at implant sites for preventing and treating peri-implant diseases is a currently investigated and debated topic.

PURPOSE

The aim of this manuscript is to explore the inflammatory mechanisms at the peri-implant soft tissue compartment, to distinguish the structural components of the peri-implant soft tissue phenotype and their role on peri-implant health, and to appraise the clinical indications and expected outcomes of soft tissue augmentation procedures at peri-implant diseased sites.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This narrative review depicts the inflammatory biomarkers and mediators in the peri-implant crevicular fluid utilized to diagnose peri-implant disease and that have been shown to be associated with peri-implant soft tissue phenotype modification and disease resolution. The impact of the peri-implant soft tissue phenotype, involving keratinized mucosa (KM) width, attached mucosa (AM), mucosal thickness (MT), and supracrestal tissue height (STH), on peri-implant health, esthetic, patient's comfort and disease prevention are discussed. The manuscript also illustrates the use of ultrasonography for the detection of peri-implant health/disease and the evaluation of the treatment outcomes following surgical therapies.

RESULTS

Current evidence indicates that soft tissue phenotype modification at implant sites with inadequate KM width, AM and MT can be beneficial for promoting peri-implant health and improving patient's comfort and hygiene procedures. Treatment approaches and outcomes from the available literature on soft tissue phenotype modification in combination with conventional techniques at sites with peri-implant mucositis or peri-implantitis are presented and discussed in detail.

CONCLUSIONS

Soft tissue grafting can be beneficial in preventing and treating peri-implant diseases. Clinical recommendations based on the disease, soft tissue phenotype characteristics and bone defect morphology are provided for a comprehensive hard- and soft-tissue-oriented treatment of peri-implant disease.

Minimal invasiveness in the reconstructive treatment of peri-implantitis defects

Peri-implantitis is a plaque-associated pathologic condition occurring in tissues around dental implants, clinically characterized by increased peri-implant probing pocket depth and progressive loss of supporting bone. Consequently, to arrest further disease progression and to increase the chance to obtain re-osseointegration, surgical reconstructive procedures have been adopted. In particular, following a paradigm gathered from periodontal therapy, recent protocols have underlined the importance of a minimally invasive approach to optimize the outcomes of therapy while minimizing the risks of postoperative complications. The present review summarizes the level of evidence on the surgical reconstructive protocols focusing on the new approaches aiming to minimize surgical trauma and patients' postoperative discomfort, underlining the pros and cons of each treatment modality.