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.

Comprehensive treatment protocol for peri-implantitis: an up-to date narrative review of the literature

This narrative review describes up-to-date treatment options for peri-implantitis and proposes a treatment protocol and flowchart based on the current scientific evidence. Peri-implantitis treatment should be based on the phased treatment protocol for periodontitis, which is a continuous flow of decisions for extraction, nonsurgical and surgical treatments with step-by-step re-evaluation. The protocol's goals are to fulfill the success criteria for peri-implantitis treatment (probing depth of ≤5 mm, and absence of bleeding on probing, suppuration, and progressive bone loss) and to halt disease progression. Fixtures with peri-implantitis can initially be classified as failed or failing. A failed implant needs to be removed. In contrast, nonsurgical and surgical treatments can be applied to a failing implant. Nonsurgical treatment should be the initial treatment for failing implants; however, sole nonsurgical treatment was regarded as inefficient for peri-implantitis. Recent studies have found that the adjunctive use of antibiotics to nonsurgical debridement increased the success of nonsurgical treatment for peri-implantitis. Surgical treatments can be classified into resective, access, and reconstructive surgeries. The technique should be selected according to the patient's bone defect configuration, which relate to regenerative potential. Various combinations of decontamination methods (e.g., mechanical, chemical, and pharmacological approaches) are required to achieve absolute surface decontamination. Clinicians should select an appropriate surface decontamination strategy according to the purpose of surgery. After signs of disease disappear and its progression is halted through active peri-implantitis treatment, it is necessary to enroll patients into maintenance programs. Compliance of patients with the maintenance program reduces the recurrence of peri-implantitis and sustains clinical success after treatment. Maintenance visits should include professional plaque control and hygiene care reinforcement for patients, and their interval should be set according to individual peri-implantitis risk. Clinicians should remind that peri-implantitis treatment is not a single procedure, but rather a continuing cycle of treatment and re-evaluation.

Operating microscope-assisted reconstructive strategy for peri-implantitis: A case series report

BACKGROUND

Treating peri-implantitis with reconstructive means has been largely unpredictable due to access limitations for surface decontamination, unfavorable bony topography, difficulty in achieving wound stability, and inferior soft tissue qualities. A microsurgical approach with the use of the operating microscope (OM) that provides adjustable higher magnification (∼5-30 times) and coaxial illumination, coupled with the use of microsurgical instruments, may overcome, or alleviate some of the abovementioned obstacles, resulting in more predictable outcomes.

METHODS

Three patients received reconstructive therapy for correcting peri-implant defects under OM in private practice settings. After precise incisions to preserve soft tissue volume, the flaps were dissected prudently from underlying granulomatous tissues, which were subsequently removed, followed by controlled flap releasing under ∼10-15x magnification. Surface decontamination was performed using a piezoelectric ultrasonic device, air polishing, and hand instruments at ∼30x magnification. The biomaterial selections were dehydrated human de-epithelialized amnion-chorion membrane with mineralized allograft particulates in two cases and xenografts in one case, based on the surgeons' preference. Wound closure followed the non-submerged approach.

RESULTS

These cases demonstrated uneventful soft tissue healing, favorable radiographic bone fill, and disease resolution with follow-ups ranging from 2 to 4 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Preliminary data suggest encouraging outcomes after the microsurgical approach following biological as well as biomechanical principles for peri-implant defect reconstruction.

Peri-implantitis management by resective surgery combined with implantoplasty and Er:YAG laser irradiation, accompanied by free gingival graft: a case report

The optimal method for decontamination of implant surfaces for peri-implantitis treatment remains controversial. In recent years, erbium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Er:YAG) laser irradiation and implantoplasty (IP) (i.e. mechanical modification of the implant) have been reported to be effective in decontaminating implant surfaces during the surgical treatment. Also, a lack of adequate keratinized mucosa (KM) around the implant is known to be associated with more plaque accumulation, tissue inflammation, attachment loss, and mucosal recession, increasing the risk of peri-implantitis. Therefore, free gingival graft (FGG) has been recommended for gaining adequate KM around the implant. However, the necessity of acquiring KM for the treatment of peri-implantitis using FGG remains unclear. In this report, we applied the apically positioned flap (APF) as resective surgery for peri-implantitis treatment in conjunction with IP and Er:YAG laser irradiation to polish/clean the implant surface. Furthermore, FGG was conducted simultaneously to create additional KM, which increased the tissue stability and contributed to the positive results. The two patients were 64 and 63 years old with a history of periodontitis. The removal of granulation tissue and debridement of contaminated implant surfaces were performed with Er:YAG laser irradiation post flap elevation and then modified smooth surfaces mechanically using IP. Er:YAG laser irradiation was also utilized to remove the titanium particles. In addition, we performed FGG to increase the width of KM as a vestibuloplasty. Peri-implant tissue inflammation and progressive bone resorption were not observed, and both patients maintained good oral hygiene conditions until the 1-year follow-up appointment. Bacterial analysis via high-throughput sequencing revealed proportional decreases in bacteria associated with periodontitis (Porphyromonas, Treponema, and Fusobacterium). To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to describe peri-implantitis management and bacterial change before and after procedures by resective surgery combined with IP and Er:YAG laser irradiation for peri-implantitis treatment, accompanied by FGG for increasing KM around the implants.

Efficacy of access flap and pocket elimination procedures in the management of peri-implantitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of access flap and pocket elimination procedures in the surgical treatment of peri-implantitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Systematic electronic searches (Central/MEDLINE/EMBASE) up to March 2022 were conducted to identify prospective clinical studies evaluating surgical therapy (access flap or pocket elimination procedures) of peri-implantitis. Primary outcome measures were reduction of probing depth (PD) and bleeding on probing (BOP). Risk of bias was evaluated according to study design. Meta-analysis and meta-regression were performed. Results were expressed as standardized mean effect with 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Evidence from studies directly comparing surgical with non-surgical therapy is lacking. Based on pre-post data originating from 13 prospective patient cohorts, pronounced reductions of PD (standardized mean effect: 2.2 mm; 95% CI 1.8-2.7) and BOP% (27.0; 95% CI 19.8-34.2) as well as marginal bone level gain (0.2 mm; 95% CI -0.0 to 0.5) were observed at evaluation time points ranging from 1 to 5 years. Wide prediction intervals suggested a high degree of heterogeneity. Reduction of mean PD increased by 0.7 mm (95% CI 0.5-0.9) for every millimetre in increase of mean PD at baseline. During the follow-up period ranging from 1 to 5 years, disease recurrence occurred frequently and implant loss was not uncommon.

CONCLUSIONS

Access flap and pocket elimination surgery are effective procedures in the management of peri-implantitis, although rates of disease recurrence during 5 years were high. Treatment outcomes were affected by baseline conditions.

Surgical interventions for the treatment of peri-implantitis

BACKGROUND

Peri-implantitis constitutes one of the most frequent late dental implant complications. The disease is initiated by bacterial infection; therefore, anti-infective peri-implantitis treatment strategies are required to arrest the progressive marginal bone loss and maintain the affected implant in function. Although nonsurgical treatment strategies appear to be of limited predictability, treatment outcomes have been frequently improved following surgical interventions.

PURPOSE

The present narrative review describes various surgical peri-implantitis treatment modalities, with respect to their indications, performance, and effectiveness.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The present narrative review considered the most relevant studies in the field published in the English language.

RESULTS

Surgical peri-implantitis treatment approaches can be categorized as nonreconstrucive therapy, reconstructive therapy, and combined therapy (ie, reconstructive and resective therapy). In addition to disease resolution, reconstructive approaches also seek to regenerate the bone defect and achieve reosseointegration.

CONCLUSIONS

The severity of the disease, the regenerative potential of the defetc and esthetic demands of the patient are the factors determining the surgical peri-implantitis treatment modality.

Titanium implant surface roughness after different implantoplasty protocols: A laboratory study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the surface roughness of sandblasted, large grit, acid-etched (SLA) surfaced titanium discs, after implantoplasty (IP) with different combinations of rotating instruments without or with the subsequent use of a silicone polisher.

METHODS

Titanium discs (n = 12 per group) with an SLA surface were treated with the following IP protocols: (1) Tungsten carbide bur sequence from company 1 (Komet Dental) without or with polishing (P) with a silicone polisher (Brownie®), (2) tungsten carbide bur sequence from company 2 (Hager & Meisinger GmbH) without or with P, and (3) diamond bur sequence (125, 40, 15-μm grit) without or with P. Pristine turned (T) and SLA titanium discs were used as negative and positive controls, respectively. Surface roughness measurements were taken with a contact profilometer rendering R_a and R_z values.

RESULTS

All IP protocols, even without P, resulted in significantly reduced surface roughness compared to the SLA group. The tungsten carbide bur protocols, even without P, resulted in a surface roughness similar to or significantly lower than that in the T group in terms of R_a and R_z , respectively. IP with the diamond bur sequence resulted in a significantly rougher surface compared to that achieved with the carbide burs. In all IP groups, P with a silicone polisher resulted in a significantly smoother surface.

CONCLUSIONS

IP with dedicated tungsten carbide burs without or with the subsequent use of a silicone polisher resulted in a surface roughness similar to or significantly lower than that of commercially available turned surfaces. IP with a diamond bur sequence required additional polishing to achieve a comparable surface roughness to that of commercially available turned surfaces.

Surgical therapy of peri-implantitis

Peri-implantitis is caused by a bacterial challenge; therefore, anti-infective treatment strategies should be employed to manage the disease. As nonsurgical approaches demonstrate limited efficacy in most cases of peri-implantitis, surgical interventions are often required. Treatment outcomes improve following access flap surgery, with or without adjunctive resective and/or augmentation measures. Whereas nonaugmentative therapies (ie, access flap surgery and resective techniques) primarily aim to resolve inflammation and arrest further disease progression, augmentation approaches also seek to regenerate the bony defect and achieve reosseointegration. Currently, limited evidence supports the superiority of augmentative surgical techniques for peri-implantitis treatment over nonaugmentation methods, and human histologic evidence for reosseointegration is sparse. For patients involved in regular postoperative maintenance programs, success of peri-implantitis surgical treatment based on various definitions of success was obtained in over half of the cases after 5-7 years. Despite surgical treatment, cases of further disease progression that required retreatment or led to implant loss were reported.

Implantoplasty Improves Clinical Parameters over a 2-Year Follow-Up: A Case Series

Background and Objectives: Peri-implantitis treatment is still undefined. Regenerative treatment is expensive and technically demanding due to the need to handle biomaterials, membranes and different methodologies of decontamination. Resective treatment and implantoplasty might be a viable solution. This case series presents a 24 month retrospective observational study of 10 peri-implantitis patients treated with implantoplasty. Materials and Methods: In the present case series, 10 peri-implantitis patients (20 implants) were treated with a resective approach and implantoplasty. Previous to implantoplasty, all patients underwent non-surgical treatment. This surgery consisted in a full-thickness flap and implant surface exposure. The exposed non-osseointegrated implant body was submitted to implantoplasty. The flap was apically repositioned and sutured. Patients were accompanied for 24 months. Results: The mean initial probing depth (PD) (PD = 5.37 ± 0.86 mm), bleeding on probing (BoP = 0.12 ± 0.06%) and suppuration (Sup = 0.01 ± 0.01%) decreased significantly at the 12 month evaluation (PD = 2.90 ± 0.39 mm; BoP = 0.01 ± 0.01% and Sup = 0.00 ± 0.00%). Between the 12 and 24 month evaluations, there were no significant clinical changes (PD = 2.85 ± 0.45 mm; BoP = 0.01 ± 0.01% and Sup = 0.00 ± 0.00%). Mucosal recession (MR) had a significant increase between the baseline and the first 12 months (0.69 ± 0.99 mm vs. 1.96 ± 1.33 mm), but there were no significant changes between the 12th and 24th month (1.94 ± 1.48 mm). The success rate was 100% without implant fracture or loss. Conclusions: Resective surgery and implantoplasty might be a valid option in some specific peri-implantitis cases. Properly designed clinical trials are needed to confirm this possibility.

Retrospective analysis of keratinized tissue augmentation using a xenogeneic collagen matrix for resolving peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis

PURPOSE

The significance of keratinized tissue for peri-implant health has been emphasized. However, there is an absence of clinical evidence for the use of a xenogeneic collagen matrix (XCM) to manage peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate outcomes after keratinized tissue augmentation using an XCM for the management of peri-implant diseases.

METHODS

Twelve implants (5 with peri-implant mucositis and 7 with peri-implantitis) in 10 patients were included in this study. Non-surgical treatments were first performed, but inflammation persisted in all implant sites. The implant sites all showed a lack of keratinized mucosa (KM) and vestibular depth (VD). Apically positioned flaps with XCM application were performed. Bone augmentation was simultaneously performed on peri-implantitis sites with an intrabony defect (>3 mm). The following clinical parameters were measured: the probing pocket depth (PPD), modified sulcular bleeding index (mSBI), suppuration (SUP), keratinized mucosal height (KMH), and VD.

RESULTS

There were no adverse healing events during the follow-up visits (18±4.6 months). The final KMHs and VDs were 4.34±0.86 mm and 8.0±4.05 mm, respectively, for the sites with peri-implant mucositis and 3.29±0.86 mm and 6.5±1.91 mm, respectively, for the sites with peri-implantitis. Additionally, the PPD and mSBI significantly decreased, and none of the implants presented with SUP.

CONCLUSIONS

Keratinized tissue augmentation using an XCM for sites with peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis was effective for increasing the KMH and VD and decreasing peri-implant inflammation.

Effect of implantoplasty on the elastic limit of dental implants of different diameters

BACKGROUND

Implantoplasty reduces both implant diameter and the thickness of its walls, subsequently reducing the ability of the implant to resist fracture in response to functional load. In combination with an increase in the crown-implant ratio due to bone loss, this could increase the lever effect, which in presence of high masticatory forces or parafunctional habits, could lead to complications such as fracture of the implant or loosening of the prosthetic screw.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the elastic limits of internal connection, dental implants of different designs and diameters after an implantoplasty.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This in vitro study included 315 tapered internal connection titanium dental implants, the threads of which were removed with an industrial milling machine-for standardized implantoplasty (IMP1; n = 105)-or with the conventional approach-manually, using high-speed burs (IMP2; n = 105). The remaining 105 implants were used as controls. The final implant diameters were recorded. The quality of the newly polished surfaces was assessed by scanning electron microscopy. All implants were subjected to a mechanical pressure resistance test. A Tukey's test for multiple comparisons was used to detect differences in the elastic limit and final implant diameters between the implant groups.

RESULTS

There were statistically significant differences in the elastic limit between the IMP1, IMP2, and control groups (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the implant diameter was significantly smaller in the IMP1 and IMP2 groups (p < 0.05). Scanning electron microscopy revealed smooth implant surfaces in the IMP1 and IMP2 groups, with some titanium particles visible in the IMP1 group.

CONCLUSIONS

Implantoplasty significantly decreased the elastic limit of internal connection titanium dental implants, especially in those with a smaller diameter (3-3.5 mm).

Reduced fracture load of dental implants after implantoplasty with different instrumentation sequences. An in vitro study

OBJECTIVES

To assess the mechanical stability of implants after implantoplasty and thermocyclic loading, the residual thickness of the instrumented areas and neighbouring tooth injury due to implantoplasty.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using a phantom head simulator and maxillary model implants were subjected to an implantoplasty procedure. Thirty implants were randomly assigned to receive one of three instrumentation sequences. After instrumentation, injury on neighbouring teeth was assessed. Instrumented implants and non-instrumented controls were subjected to 1.2 million cycles of thermo-mechanical loading in a chewing machine. Afterwards, maximum fracture load for all implants and an additional five pristine control implants was tested.

RESULTS

Generally, damage of neighbour teeth was a frequent finding (33 ± 56% of all cases) with considerable inter-group differences. No considerable inter-group difference for the residual implant thickness was found for different areas assessed. No implant fractured during cyclic loading. Fracture load was reduced after cyclic loading of uninstrumented implants from 2,724 ± 70 N to 2,299 ± 127 N, and after implantoplasty to 1,737 ± 165 N, while no effect by the instrumentation sequence could be observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Both implantoplasty and cyclic loading were shown to reduce the implants' maximum bending strength. Cyclic loading in a laboratory masticator, simulating a five-year equivalent of chewing, did not result in fractured implants. Since neighbouring tooth injury was assessed often, care should be taken with the selection of suitable instruments.

Resolution of peri-implantitis by means of implantoplasty as adjunct to surgical therapy: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of data on the effectiveness of implantoplasty as adjunct to the surgical management of peri-implantitis.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the resolution of peri-implantitis by means of implantoplasty as adjunct to surgical resective (RES) and reconstructive (REC) therapies and supportive maintenance.

METHODS

Patients that underwent surgical therapy to manage peri-implantitis with a follow-up of ≥12 months and enrolled in a regular peri-implant supportive care were recruited. RES group consisted of two interventions that included osseous recontouring and apically position flap (APF) and soft tissue conditioning (STC). REC was performed in the infra-osseous compartment of combined defects. Implant survival rate was recorded. Clinical and radiographic parameters were evaluated to define a "dogmatic" (case definition #1) and a "flexible" (case definition #2) therapeutic success. Univariate and multivariate multilevel backward logistic regression were applied for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 43 patients (n_implants  = 135) were retrospectively assessed. Mean observational period was ∼24 months. Implant survival rate was 97.8%, being significantly higher for APF, STC, and APF + STC (RES) when compared with REC (P = 0.01) therapy, in particular for advanced lesions (>50% of bone loss). The overall therapeutic success rate at implant-level was 66% and 79.5% for case definition #1 and #2, respectively. APF group displayed more efficient disease resolution when considered success definition #1 (72%). Contrarily, when the data were adhered to success definition #2, STC group showed a slightly higher disease resolution rate (87%). For RES group, location, favoring anterior (P = 0.04) and defect type, favoring class II (P = 0.02) displayed statistical significance for therapeutic success. For REC group, implants exhibiting a wider band of keratinized mucosa (KM) demonstrated higher therapeutic success (P = 0.008).

CONCLUSION

Implantoplasty as an adjunct to surgical therapy proved effective in terms of disease resolution and implant survival rate. Implant location, defect morphology as well as the buccal width of KM are indicators of therapeutic success.

A Mini Review on Non-augmentative Surgical Therapy of Peri-Implantitis—What Is Known and What Are the Future Challenges?

Non-augmentative surgical therapy of peri-implantitis is indicated for cases with primarily horizontal bone loss or wide defects with limited potential for bone regeneration and/or re-osseointegration. This treatment approach includes a variety of different techniques (e.g., open flap debridement, resection of peri-implant mucosa, apically positioned flaps, bone re-contouring, implantoplasty, etc.) and various relevant aspects should be considered during treatment planning. The present mini review provides an overview on what is known for the following components of non-augmentative surgical treatment of peri-implantitis and on potential future research challenges: (1) decontamination of the implant surface, (2) need of implantoplasty, (3) prescription of antibiotics, and (4) extent of resective measures.

Peri-implantitis Update: Risk Indicators, Diagnosis, and Treatment

Despite the success rates of dental implants, peri-implantitis presents as the most common complication in implant dentistry. This review discusses various factors associated with peri-implantitis and various available treatments, highlighting their advantages and disadvantages. Relevant articles on peri-implantitis published in English were reviewed from August 2010 to April 2020 in MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, and ScienceDirect. The identified risk indicators of peri-implant diseases are plaque, smoking, history of periodontitis, surface roughness, residual cement, emergence angle >30 degrees, radiation therapy, keratinized tissue width, and function time of the implant, sex, and diabetes. Peri-implantitis treatments can be divided into nonsurgical (mechanical, antiseptic, and antibiotics), surface decontamination (chemical and laser), and surgical (air powder abrasive, resective, and regenerative). However, mechanical debridement alone may fail to eliminate the causative bacteria, and this treatment should be combined with other treatments (antiseptics and surgical treatment). Surface decontamination using chemical agents may be used as an adjuvant treatment; however, the definitive clinical benefit is yet not proven. Laser treatment may result in a short-term decrease in periodontal pocket depth, while air powder abrasive is effective in cleaning a previously contaminated implant surface. Surgical elimination of a pocket, bone recontouring and plaque control are also effective for treating peri-implantitis. The current evidence indicates that regenerative approaches to treat peri-implant defects are unpredictable.

Peri-Implantitis Diagnosis and Prognosis Using Biomarkers in Peri-Implant Crevicular Fluid: A Narrative Review

Dental implant diseases, peri-implantitis (PI) and peri-implant mucositis (PIM), have shown wide prevalence in recent studies. Despite the prevalence, diagnosing peri-implant disease (PID) remains challenging as common diagnostic methods of periodontal probing and radiographs may be inaccurate. These methods only document pre-existing destruction rather than current disease activity. Furthermore, there is no current model to predict the progression of PID. Though a predictive model is lacking, biomarkers may offer some potential. Biomarkers are commonly used in medicine to objectively determine disease state, or responses to a therapeutic intervention. Gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) biomarkers have moderate diagnostic validity in periodontitis. Biomarkers in peri-implant crevicular fluid (PICF) also show promising results in regard to their diagnostic and prognostic value. The aim of this review is to summarize the current knowledge of PICF biomarkers in the diagnosis of PID and evaluate their validity to predict disease progression. This review found that PICF studies utilize different methods of sampling and interpretation with varying validity (sensitivity and specificity). A number of promising diagnostic techniques were identified. Commercially available chair-side tests for MMP-8 to diagnose periodontal disease and PID activity are now available. Future directions include proteomics and metabolomics for accurate, site-specific diagnosis and prediction of PID progression. Although more research is needed, this review concludes that the assessment of proinflammatory cytokines (IL-1β, TNFα, MMP-8) in the PICF may be of value to diagnose PI and PIM but current research remains insufficient to indicate whether biomarkers predict peri-implant disease progression.

Two to six-year disease resolution and marginal bone stability rates of a modified resective-implantoplasty therapy in 32 peri-implantitis cases

BACKGROUND

Different nonsurgical, antibacterial, surgical, and regenerative approaches to treat peri-implantitis have been proposed, but there is no an actual "gold" standard treatment showing the most favorable results to counteract peri-implantitis effects.

PURPOSE

To evaluate radiographically and clinically the disease resolution and peri-implant marginal bone stability rates of peri-implantitis cases treated through a combined resective-implantoplasty therapy in a moderate to long-term period.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Records of patients diagnosed with peri-implantitis and treated through the same protocol applying a combined resective-implantoplasty therapy with minimum 2-year follow-up were screened. Eligible patients were contacted and asked to undergo clinical and radiologic examination. Progressive marginal bone loss, bleeding on probing, suppuration, implant mobility, and implant fracture were considered to establish the disease resolution rate and peri-implant bone stability of the treated implants.

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients with 32 treated implants fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Over the 2 to 6-year follow-up, (mean time: 3.4 ± 1.5 years), the disease resolution rate was 83% (patient level) and 87% (implant level). Four implants (13%) were lost or removed due to continuous MBL and osseointegration failure. At follow-up, peri-implant marginal bone remained stable with no further bone loss in 87% of the treated implants. BOP was absent in 89.3% (implant level), suppuration was resolved in all cases, and no pain or implant fracture was reported.

CONCLUSION

Implantoplasty treated cases showed high disease resolution rate and peri-implant marginal bone stability. This surgical antibiofilm strategy can counteract peri-implantitis progression providing an adequate environment for implant function and longevity over a moderate to long-term period.